Betty Jo Kelly, Complainant,v.Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 25, 2008
0120064604 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 25, 2008)

0120064604

03-25-2008

Betty Jo Kelly, Complainant, v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.


Betty Jo Kelly,

Complainant,

v.

Michael J. Astrue,

Commissioner,

Social Security Administration,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01200646041

Agency No. 040453SSA

DECISION

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts complainant's

appeal from the agency's July 10, 2006, final decision 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., Section 501 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �

791 et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),

as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

Complainant began her employment with the agency in June 2001,

as a Schedule A appointment, and was promoted from a file clerk to

legal assistant in the Office of Hearings and Appeals at the agency's

"Mega-Center" in Springfield, Virginia. She filed a formal complaint,

claiming discrimination based on race (Caucasian), disability (carpal

tunnel syndrome, osteoarthritis, neuropathy), age (D.O.B. 03/18/47),

and in reprisal for prior protected EEO when: in April 2004, (a) she

was harassed and not converted to a career position from her Schedule

A appointment; and (b) she was denied a reasonable accommodation to

rotate among assignments.2 Following an investigation, complainant did

not request a hearing, and the agency issued its final decision (FAD),

finding no discrimination.

The agency assumed arguendo that complainant established a prima facie

case of discrimination as to all of her alleged bases, management

articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for not converting

her to a career position. Specifically, her first level supervisor (S1)

made no recommendation regarding her conversion. Moreover, management

officials believed that her demeanor and level of professionalism

were matters of concern. The agency found that complainant failed

to show that these reasons were pretextual or that she was subjected

to harassment. With regard to her claim that she was denied reasonable

accommodation, the agency found that management officials testified,

and complainant did not dispute, that she rotated among assignments

and had been provided with numerous reasonable accommodations to allow

her to perform her assigned duties. The agency noted that, although

complainant wished to have the reasonable accommodations she received

memorialized in writing, such a requirement does not exist. It concluded

that complainant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence

that the agency discriminated against her as alleged.

The standard of review in rendering this appellate decision is de novo,

i.e., the Commission will examine the record and review the documents,

statements, and testimony of record, including any timely and relevant

submissions of the parties, and issue its decision based on the

Commission's own assessment of the record and its interpretation of

the law. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a); EEOC Management Directive 110,

Chapter 9, � VI.A. (November 9, 1999).

After a review of the record in its entirety and consideration of

all statements submitted on appeal, including those not specifically

addressed,3 it is the decision of the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission to affirm the agency's final decision, because the

preponderance of the evidence of record does not establish that

discrimination occurred.

Accordingly, the agency's decision is affirmed.

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

__03-25-2008________________

Date

1 Due to a new data system, the case number has been restyled.

2 On November 23, 2004, the agency dismissed three claims, and complainant

has not addressed them on appeal. We affirm the agency's action.

3 We assume without finding, for purposes of analysis only, that

complainant is an individual with a disability.

??

??

??

??

2

0120064604

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120064604