Warren E. Smith, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Great Lakes/ Mid West Areas) Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 2, 1999
01973569 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 2, 1999)

01973569

04-02-1999

Warren E. Smith, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Great Lakes/ Mid West Areas) Agency.


Warren E. Smith v. United States Postal Service

01973569

April 2, 1999

Warren E. Smith, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01973569

) Agency No. 4-J-460-1001-96

William J. Henderson, ) Hearing No. 240-96-5130X

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

(Great Lakes/ Mid West Areas) )

Agency. )

________________________________)

DECISION

Appellant timely appealed the agency's final decision that it had

not discriminated against him in violation of Title VII of the Civil

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

Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29

C.F.R. � 621 et seq. In his complaint, appellant alleged that the agency

discriminated against him on the bases of race (African-American), color

(dark complexion), and age D.O.B. (5/3/48), when he was discharged during

his probation. This appeal is accepted by the Commission in accordance

with EEOC Order No. 960.001.

Appellant was employed by the agency as a Part-Time Flexible (PTF)

mail carrier at the Carmel, Indiana post office.

Following an investigation, appellant requested a hearing before an

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) administrative judge (AJ).

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.109(e), the AJ issued a Recommended Decision

(RD) without a hearing, finding no discrimination.

The AJ found that appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of

race, color and age discrimination. The AJ determined that appellant did

not satisfy his basic job requirements. Furthermore, appellant failed

to show any similarly situated employee(s), outside of his protected

group(s), who constantly did not satisfy his or her job requirements,

but was not discharged. Assuming that appellant had established a prima

facie case of race, color and age discrimination, the AJ concluded that

the agency articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its

action, which appellant failed to establish as pretextual. Specifically,

appellant was not able to timely deliver the mail, despite being provided

with remedial training. Additionally, in order to increase his delivery

time, on a regular basis he was permitted to work on the same assignments,

and a customer service representative accompanied him on his route.

On March 10, 1997, the agency issued a final decision, adopting the AJ's

finding of no discrimination. It is from this decision that appellant

now appeals.

After a careful review of the entire record, including arguments and

evidence not specifically addressed in this decision, the Commission

finds that the AJ's RD sets forth the relevant facts, and properly

analyzes the appropriate regulations, policies, and laws applicable

to appellant's complaint as a disparate treatment claim. Therefore,

the Commission discerns no basis in which to disturb the AJ's finding

of no discrimination. Accordingly, it is the decision of the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission to AFFIRM the agency's final decision

finding no discrimination.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

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

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

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

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

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)

It is the position of the Commission that 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.

You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have

interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that

a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the

date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action

is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)

CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult

an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction

in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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 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:

April 2, 1999

DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director

Office of Federal Operations