0120080171
10-18-2007
Arlene F. Robinson, Complainant, v. Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.
Arlene F. Robinson,
Complainant,
v.
Henry M. Paulson, Jr.,
Secretary,
Department of the Treasury,
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120080171
Hearing No. 570-2007-00090X
Agency No. TD062203
DECISION
On July 19, 2007, complainant filed an appeal from the agency's June
29, 2007 final order concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO)
complaint alleging 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., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),
as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. The appeal is deemed timely and is
accepted for de novo review, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a). For the
following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's final order.
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, complainant worked
as a Financial Systems Specialist, GS-501-12, at the Bureau of Public
Debt, Office of Financing, in Washington, D.C. On February 16, 2006,
complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that she was discriminated
against on the bases of race (African-American), sex (female), and age
(D.O.B. 09/06/57) when, on September 29, 2005, she received a seven-day
suspension for inattention to duty regarding her failure to properly
prepare for a May 9, 2005 proofing assignment and her failure to fulfill
a May 18, 2005 proofreader responsibility.
At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant was provided with a
copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request
a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely
requested a hearing. When complainant did not object, the AJ assigned
to the case granted the agency's February 6, 2007 motion for a decision
without a hearing and issued a decision without a hearing on June
17, 2007. The agency subsequently issued a final order adopting the
AJ's finding that complainant failed to prove that she was subjected to
discrimination as alleged. Complainant has raised no new arguments in
support of her appeal.
The allocation of burdens and order of presentation of proof in a Title
VII and/or ADEA case alleging disparate treatment discrimination is a
three step procedure: complainant has the initial burden of proving, by
a preponderance of the evidence, a prima facie case of discrimination;
the burden then shifts to the employer to articulate some legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reason for its challenged action; and complainant must
then prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the legitimate reason
offered by the employer was not its true reason, but was a pretext for
discrimination. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).
Assuming complainant established a prima facie case of discrimination on
the alleged bases, we find that the agency has nevertheless articulated
legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for issuing the suspension.
Specifically, complainant committed the infractions in question,
and her past disciplinary record (as well as mitigating measures) was
considered in determining that a seven-day suspension was warranted.
Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence that discriminatory
animus motivated this particular agency action.
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the
AJ's decision without a hearing was appropriate, as no genuine issue
of material fact is in dispute.1 See Petty v. Department of Defense,
EEOC Appeal No. 01A24206 (July 11, 2003). Therefore, we AFFIRM the
agency's final order.
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:
October
18,
2007
______________________________
__________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Date
Office of Federal Operations
1 In this case, we find that the record was adequately developed for
the AJ to issue a decision without a hearing.
??
??
??
??
2
0120080171
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C. 20036