Carolyn H. Lucas, Petitioner,v.Dr. Francis J. Harvey, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 2, 2005
04a50025 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 2, 2005)

04a50025

11-02-2005

Carolyn H. Lucas, Petitioner, v. Dr. Francis J. Harvey, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.


Carolyn H. Lucas v. Department of the Army

04A50025

November 2, 2005

.

Carolyn H. Lucas,

Petitioner,

v.

Dr. Francis J. Harvey,

Secretary,

Department of the Army,

Agency.

Petition No. 04A50025

Appeal No. 01A43697

Agency No. ARJDHQS02MAY0007

Hearing No. 130-A3-8245X

DECISION ON A PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT

On July 12, 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC

or Commission) docketed a petition for enforcement to examine the

enforcement of an order set forth in Carolyn H. Lucas v. Department

of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01A43697 (May 19, 2005). This petition

for enforcement is accepted by the Commission pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503. Petitioner alleged that the agency failed to fully comply

with the Commission's order to post the �Notice to Employees.�

Petitioner filed a complaint in which she alleged that the agency

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

sex (Female), and in reprisal for prior EEO activity. Petitioner

appealed the agency's final decision concluding that she failed to

show that any of the agency's actions were a pretext to mask unlawful

discrimination/retaliation. In EEOC Appeal No. 01A43697, the Commission

found that the agency discriminated against petitioner on the bases of

race and sex.

Among other things, the Commission's Order specified that the agency had

to post the �Notice to Employees� that was attached to the decision.

On July 12, 2005, the Commission docketed a Petition for Enforcement

of an order set forth in Carolyn H. Lucas v. Department of the Army,

EEOC Appeal No. 01A43697 (May 19, 2005). Petitioner alleged that the

agency was in noncompliance with the Commission's order. In response,

the agency submitted documentation establishing that it had reached a

settlement agreement with petitioner and that the posting would not be

displayed. The Commission determined that the agency had complied with

its decision, thereby terminating compliance monitoring. Carolyn H. Lucas

v. Department of the Army, EEOC Compliance No. 06A50625 (July 14, 2005).

Subsequently, the record establishes that the agency posted the �Notice

to Employees� on July 21, 2005.

Based on the foregoing, we find that the agency has complied with the

Commission's Order. Therefore, after review of the instant petition for

enforcement, the agency's response, the prior Commission's decisions,

and the entire record, it is the decision of the Commission to DENY the

petition. There is no right of administrative appeal from this denial.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)

This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right

of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. 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.

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

November 2, 2005

__________________

Date