0120063138
10-24-2007
Charles E. Lyne, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Charles E. Lyne,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01200631381
Agency No. 1K-221-0009-04
Hearing No. 100-2005-00454X
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal from the agency's final action dated April
10, 2006, finding no discrimination with regard to his complaint.
In his complaint, dated July 22, 2004, complainant, a Mail Processing
Clerk at the Merrifield Processing and Distribution Center in Virginia,
alleged discrimination based on disability (deaf) when (1) from April
-October 2003, management did not respond to his requests to be a 204-B
(Acting Supervisor); and (2) his October 2002 request to have a panel
interview rescheduled has not been granted.
Upon completion of the investigation of the complaint, complainant
requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). On March
31, 2006, the AJ issued a decision without holding a hearing, finding no
discrimination. The agency's final action implemented the AJ's decision.
The Commission's regulations allow an AJ to issue a decision without a
hearing when he or she finds that there is no genuine issue of material
fact. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.109(g). This regulation is patterned after the
summary judgment procedure set forth in Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that summary judgment
is appropriate where a court determines that, given the substantive
legal and evidentiary standards that apply to the case, there exists
no genuine issue of material fact. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,
477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). In ruling on a motion for summary judgment,
a court's function is not to weigh the evidence but rather to determine
whether there are genuine issues for trial. Id. at 249. The evidence of
the non-moving party must be believed at the summary judgment stage and
all justifiable inferences must be drawn in the non-moving party's favor.
Id. at 255. An issue of fact is "genuine" if the evidence is such that
a reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non-moving party.
Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital
Equip. Corp., 846 F.2D 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988). A fact is "material"
if it has the potential to affect the outcome of the case.
The Commission finds that grant of summary judgment was appropriate,
as no genuine dispute of material fact exists. In this case, the AJ
determined that, assuming arguendo that complainant had established a
prima facie case of discrimination, the agency articulated legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reasons for the alleged incidents. With regard to
claim (1), complainant's supervisor stated that complainant told him
that he was interested in being a 204-B supervisor and he relayed this
information to his manager. Both the supervisor and the manager stated
that the current two 204-B supervisors acted in that capacity for over
three years and there had been no recent need to train or utilize others
as 204-B supervisors.
With regard to claim (2), complainant claimed that he turned in his
Knowledge, Skills and Assessment (KSA) to an individual on September
16, 2002, for a Maintenance Mechanic position and a panel interview
was scheduled on October 9, 2002. He however called the Hiring and
Testing Department to cancel the interview as he was unable to report
due to illness. According to complainant, the letter scheduling his
interview stated that it would not be rescheduled and the employee would
be removed from further consideration. The agency stated that complainant
did not report to the initial interview panel in October 2002, because
an alleged dog bite prevented him from attending it. The AJ noted that
the agency's original examiner who originally scheduled the panel was
reassigned to another position and was replaced by a new individual.
The AJ also noted that the panel for complainant was not reconvened for
some time not until June 10, 2005, due to the new individual's lack of
experience and oversight. There is no indication that this delay was
motivated by discrimination. Complainant attended the panel and an
interpreter was present during the panel interview.
The Commission agrees with the AJ that complainant failed to rebut the
agency's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the alleged incidents.
Furthermore, we note that complainant has not claimed that he was denied
a reasonable accommodation or that he was required to work beyond his
medical restrictions.
Accordingly, the agency's final action 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
10/24/07
__________________
Date
1 Due to a new data system, this case has been redesignated with the
above referenced appeal number.
??
??
??
??
4
0120063138
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C. 20036