Complainant,v.Dan M. Tangherlini, Acting Administrator, General Services Administration, Agency.Download PDFEqual Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 29, 20130120120551 (E.E.O.C. May. 29, 2013) Copy Citation U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Complainant, v. Dan M. Tangherlini, Acting Administrator, General Services Administration, Agency. Appeal No. 0120120551 Agency No. 10-NCR-WP-SW-10 DECISION Complainant appeals to the Commission from the Agency’s final decision dated October 13, 2011, finding no discrimination. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final decision. BACKGROUND In her complaint, dated August 10, 2010, Complainant alleged discrimination based on race (African American), sex (female), and disability (physical and mental) when: on July 2, 2010, her supervisor charged her Absence Without Leave (AWOL); and on July 13, 2010, the supervisor issued her an official reprimand. After completion of the investigation of the complaint, Complainant requested a final Agency decision without a hearing. The Agency thus issued its final Agency decision concluding that it asserted legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions, which Complainant failed to rebut. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS As this is an appeal from a decision issued without a hearing, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b), the Agency’s decision is subject to de novo review by the Commission. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a). See Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, at Chapter 9, § VI.A. (November 9, 1999) (explaining that the de novo standard of review “requires that the Commission examine the record without regard to the factual and legal determinations of the previous decision maker,” and that EEOC “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”). 0120120551 2 After a review of the record, assuming arguendo that Complainant established a prima facie case of discrimination, we find that the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the alleged incidents. During the relevant time period at issue, Complainant was employed as a Staff Specialist, GS-12, Public Building Service, National Capital Region, Regional Commissioner’s Office. Specifically, Complainant’s supervisor indicated that he charged Complainant as AWOL because on July 2, 2010, Complainant, without his authorization, left work early. Complainant does not dispute this. The supervisor also stated that on July 13, 2010, he issued Complainant the letter of reprimand due to her unprofessional treatment toward her coworkers, the staff, and himself. Therein, the supervisor identified nine incidents of Complainant’s improper conduct and her failure to follow supervisory instruction. The supervisor indicated that he issued the reprimand to Complainant after consulting with his Chief of Staff and the Office of Human Resources. Upon review, we find that Complainant failed to show that she was treated less favorably than a similarly situated employee under similar circumstances. It is noted that we do not address in this decision whether Complainant is a qualified individual with a disability. Furthermore, we note that Complainant has not claimed that she was denied a reasonable accommodation concerning the alleged incidents. Based on the foregoing, we find that Complainant has failed to show that the Agency’s actions were motivated by discrimination as she alleged. CONCLUSION Accordingly, the Agency’s final decision is AFFIRMED. STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0610) 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), at 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 77960, Washington, DC 20013. In the absence of a legible postmark, 0120120551 3 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 (S0610) 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 (Z0610) 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 from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also 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 with the Court 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 May 29, 2013 Date Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation