Vicky Quinn, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 6, 2001
01991904 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 6, 2001)

01991904

12-06-2001

Vicky Quinn, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Vicky Quinn v. United States Postal Service

01991904

12-06-01

.

Vicky Quinn,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01991904

Agency No. 4F-945-0085-97

Hearing No. 370-98-X2212

DECISION

Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final decision

of December 1, 1998 concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO)

complaint of unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Title

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. �

2000e et seq. The appeal is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

Complainant alleges she was discriminated against on the bases of race

(other), national origin (Hispanic), sex (female), and reprisal for

prior EEO activity (prior Title VII charge) when:

on December 10, 1996, the EEO Counselor denied complainant representation

while being interviewed off the clock regarding her EEO complaint;

on December 12, 1996, she was denied a request for Family Medical Leave

Act (FMLA) leave;

on December 24, 1996, she was denied a request for a change of schedule;

and

on December 27, 1996, she was not allowed to sign for her accountables

(receipts) in the office.

For the following reasons, the Commission affirms the agency's final

decision, dated December 1, 1998. The record reveals that complainant,

a Letter Carrier at the agency's Martinez Post Office, in Martinez,

California, filed a formal EEO complaint with the agency on January 22,

1997, alleging that the agency had discriminated against her as referenced

above. At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant received a

copy of the investigative report and requested a hearing before an EEOC

Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ issued a decision without a hearing,

finding that there were no issues of credibility in dispute and finding

no discrimination.

The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a prima facie

case of race or gender discrimination. The AJ further concluded that the

agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions.

Specifically, the AJ found that the complainant failed to submit the

required supporting documentation with her FMLA leave request. The AJ

found that complainant did not establish that more likely than not,

the agency's articulated reasons were a pretext to mask unlawful

discrimination/retaliation. In reaching this conclusion, the AJ found

that complainant failed to rebut the evidence that coworkers who have

no known prior EEO activity were also denied changes of schedule during

the relevant time period.

The agency's final decision implemented the AJ's decision. Complainant

makes no new contentions on appeal, and the agency requests that we

affirm its final decision.

After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the

AJ's decision properly summarized the relevant facts and referenced the

appropriate regulations, policies, and laws. We note that complainant

failed to present evidence that any of the agency's actions were in

retaliation for complainant's prior EEO activity or were motivated

by discriminatory animus toward complainant's race, sex or national

origin. We discern no basis to disturb the AJ's decision. Therefore, after

a careful review of the record, including complainant's contentions on

appeal, the agency's response, and arguments and evidence not specifically

addressed in this decision, we AFFIRM the agency's final decision.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0701)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation

of material fact or law; or

2. The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,

practices, or operations of the agency.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed

with the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar

days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of

receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for

29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests

and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the

request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by

mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include

proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0900)

You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States

District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you

receive this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as

the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official agency head

or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and

official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your

case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization,

and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action

must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above

("Right to File A Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

___12-06-01_______________

Date