Edward Dwyer, Complainant,v.John Ashcroft, Attorney General, Department of Justice, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 15, 2003
07A00037 (E.E.O.C. May. 15, 2003)

07A00037

05-15-2003

Edward Dwyer, Complainant, v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General, Department of Justice, Agency.


Edward Dwyer v. Department of Justice

07A00037

May 15, 2003

.

Edward Dwyer,

Complainant,

v.

John Ashcroft,

Attorney General,

Department of Justice,

Agency.

Appeal No. 07A00037

Agency No. P-97-9143

Hearing No. 280-98-4217X

DECISION

Following its June 21, 2000 final order, the agency filed a timely

appeal which the Commission accepts pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

On appeal, the agency requests that the Commission affirm its partial

rejection of the relief awarded by an EEOC Administrative Judge's (AJ)

pursuant to the AJ's finding that the agency discriminated against

complainant on the basis of his disability. For the following reasons,

the Commission MODIFIES the agency's final order.

Complainant, a Correctional Counselor employed by the agency at the United

States Penitentiary in Marion, Illinois, filed a formal EEO complaint with

the agency on May 21, 1997, alleging that the agency had discriminated

against him on the basis of disability (Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy)

when he was denied reasonable accommodation for his condition and was

treated differently than similarly situated employees.

Following the investigation of the complaint, a hearing was held before

an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ found that although the agency

initially attempted to provide complainant with reasonable accommodation

for his disability, it subsequently failed to address problems experienced

by complainant in his work assignment and so, in fact, failed to afford

him reasonable accommodation. The AJ ordered relief as follows: a

posted notice of the finding of discrimination; mandatory training �for

all employees of the [a]gency� on the Rehabilitation Act; reinstatement

of complainant, contingent upon a fitness for duty examination, to a

Correctional Counselor position in a location that complies with his

medical restrictions, or other available vacant position; back pay and

benefits from the date of complainant's second (on-the-job) injury until

the date of reinstatement, including payment for 291.5 hours of sick

leave; compensatory damages in the amount of $2900; and attorney's fees

and costs, to be determined.

On June 21, 2000, the agency issued a final order stating that it would

not fully implement the AJ's decision. In an attached memorandum,

the agency accepted the AJ's finding of disability discrimination,

but objected to certain elements of the relief awarded. The agency

noted that complainant had not been removed from employment, but was

out on workers' compensation. The agency stated that complainant was

in receipt of workers' compensation benefits, and that the award of

back pay therefore was inappropriate. Regarding restoration of sick

leave, the agency noted that complainant had used and been paid for

sick leave, and that if and when complainant returned to duty, it would

restore his sick leave balance. The agency further stated that it did

not believe complainant had been given a full and fair opportunity to

submit evidence bearing on compensatory damages, and indicated that

it would allow complainant the opportunity to demonstrate that he was

entitled to a greater amount of compensatory damages than was awarded

by the AJ. The agency also stated that it would pay complainant's

reasonable attorney's fees and costs, but did not address the notice of

discrimination or the EEO training.

The agency timely filed an appeal with the Commission in connection with

its determination that it would not fully implement the AJ's decision.

Complainant does not contest the agency's appeal, but argues that the

agency has failed to return him to duty in accordance with the AJ's

decision. Complainant noted that he underwent a fitness-for-duty

examination which resulted in the imposition of the same physical

restriction under which he had been working previously. Complainant

stated that, nonetheless, the Warden of the facility has failed to return

him to duty, and has not responded to his further inquiries.<1>

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by

an AJ will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Substantial evidence is defined as �such relevant evidence as a reasonable

mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.� Universal

Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474, 477 (1951)

(citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not discriminatory

intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint,

456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982). An AJ's conclusions of law are subject to a

de novo standard of review, whether or not a hearing was held.

Once discrimination is found, a complainant is entitled to �make whole�

relief, that is, a remedy which places him as nearly as possible in the

position he would have occupied but for the unlawful discrimination.

See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 418-419 (1975).

The Commission finds that in this case, the relief awarded by the AJ

either exceeded the �make whole� standard, or is otherwise inappropriate

under the facts of the case.

Reinstatement

The record reflects that complainant has been in receipt of workers'

compensation benefits while out of work on account of an on-the-job injury

occasioned by the agency's failure to provide reasonable accommodation.

Because complainant is still an employee of the agency, reinstatement is

not an appropriate remedy. However, it appears that what the AJ intended

was for the agency to return complainant to duty, with any necessary

reasonable accommodation. According to complainant, he has undergone

the requisite fitness-for-duty examination, and is subject to the same

limitations previously made known to the agency, but still has not been

returned to work.<2> The Commission therefore will order the agency to

return complainant to duty, with such reasonable accommodation as may

be required, in a location that complies with his medical restrictions

or other vacant position available at the agency.

Back Pay

The agency correctly notes that workers' compensation benefits for lost

wages may be off-set against an award of back pay. Therefore, while

complainant is entitled to back pay for the period of time he has been

off duty on account of the agency's unlawful discrimination, the agency

may deduct the wage-loss benefits complainant has received pursuant to

his workers' compensation claim. See, e.g., Finlay v. United States

Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01942985 (April 29, 1997).

Sick Leave

Because of the agency's failure to accommodate complainant's disability,

complainant was required to use 291.5 hours of sick leave. Although the

agency correctly notes that complainant is not entitled to be repaid

for the sick leave he used<3>, he is entitled to have his sick leave

balance restored, regardless of whether he returns to duty. Therefore,

to the extent that complainant's sick leave balance has not been restored

pursuant to workers' compensation procedures, the agency must restore

up to 291.5 hours of sick leave.

Compensatory Damages

The AJ awarded complainant compensatory damages in the amount of $2900.

The agency does not disagree that complainant is entitled to at least

that amount, but states that it would allow complainant the opportunity

to submit further evidence of entitlement to a greater amount.

The Commission therefore will order the agency to tender the $2900 in

damages, pending its determination whether complainant is entitled to

a greater amount.

Attorney's Fees and Costs

The agency acknowledges that its is obligated to pay complainant's

reasonable attorney's fees and costs, subject to complainant's submission

of the necessary supporting documentation. The amount of fees and costs

payable is not before the Commission at this time.

Preventive Action

The AJ ordered the agency to commit to preventive action to ensure that

the unlawful discrimination would be unlikely to recur. As an example,

the AJ directed that the agency should provide training relevant to

the Rehabilitation Act to �all employees.� The Commission finds this

portion of the AJ's order to be somewhat over-broad, as it might be said

to encompass all employees of the Department of Justice, with no showing

that disability discrimination is a department-wide problem. Rather,

the Commission will modify this provision to require mandatory training

on the Rehabilitation Act for all supervisory and managerial employees

of the Marion, Illinois Penitentiary. The Commission will also order

the agency to consider disciplinary action against the agency officials

responsible for the discriminatory actions in this case.

Notice of Discrimination

The agency did not addressed the posted notice of the finding of

discrimination. The Commission will order the agency to post the notice,

if it has not already done so.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, after a careful review of the record, including arguments

and evidence not specifically discussed in this decision, the Commission

MODIFIES the agency's final order and remands the matter to the agency

to take corrective action in accordance with this decision and the

Order below.

ORDER (D0900)

The agency is ORDERED to take the following remedial action:

The agency shall return complainant to duty as a Correctional Counselor,

or a substantially equivalent position, in a location that complies with

his medical restrictions at its Marion, Illinois Penitentiary, with any

necessary reasonable accommodation. The agency may solicit current

information from complainant regarding his present fitness for duty,

including medical limitations, in order to provide such accommodation.

The agency shall afford complainant up to thirty (30) days to submit

such information. Complainant shall cooperate by providing such

information as the agency may require.

The agency shall tender back pay and benefits, as set forth in the

paragraphs below, from the date on which complainant stopped work in

August 1999 until the date complainant returns to duty pursuant to

paragraph 1, supra, or declines an offer to return to duty. The agency

shall offset the amount of back pay awarded by any workers' compensation

wage-replacement benefits received by complainant during the same period.

The agency shall restore complainant's sick leave balance, up to

291.5 hours. The agency shall offset any part of this balance which

previously has been restored through the workers' compensation program.

If it has not already done so, the agency shall immediately tender to

complainant compensatory damages in the amount of $2900.

The agency shall determine complainant's entitlement to additional

compensatory damages. The agency shall request complainant to

submit additional evidence in support of his claim, and shall afford

complainant up to forty-five(45) days from receipt of its request to

submit such additional evidence. Within thirty (30) days of receipt

of complainant's evidence, the agency shall determine the amount of

damages payable and shall tender payment to complainant, less the $2900

already paid pursuant to paragraph 4, supra.

The agency shall provide mandatory training on rights and obligations

under the Rehabilitation Act to all supervisory and managerial personnel

at its Marion, Illinois Penitentiary.

The agency shall consider taking disciplinary action against the

officials identified as being responsible for the discriminatory

treatment perpetrated against complainant. The agency shall report

its decision. If the agency decides to take disciplinary action, it

shall identify the action taken. If the agency decides not to take

disciplinary action, it shall set forth the reason(s) for its decision

not to impose discipline.

The agency shall pay complainant's attorney's fees and costs, consistent

with the paragraph below entitled, �Attorney's Fees.�

If it has not already done so, the agency shall post a notice of the

finding of discrimination, in accordance with the paragraph below

entitled, �Posting Order.�

The agency shall determine the appropriate amount of back pay (with

interest, if applicable) and other benefits due complainant, pursuant

to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.501, no later than sixty (60) calendar days after

the date this decision becomes final. The complainant shall cooperate

in the agency's efforts to compute the amount of back pay and benefits

due, and shall provide all relevant information requested by the agency.

If there is a dispute regarding the exact amount of back pay and/or

benefits, the agency shall issue a check to the complainant for the

undisputed amount within sixty (60) calendar days of the date the

agency determines the amount it believes to be due. The complainant

may petition for enforcement or clarification of the amount in dispute.

The petition for clarification or enforcement must be filed with the

Compliance Officer, at the address referenced in the statement entitled

�Implementation of the Commission's Decision.�

The agency is further directed to submit a report of compliance, as

provided in the statement entitled �Implementation of the Commission's

Decision.� The report shall include supporting documentation of the

agency's calculation of back pay and other benefits due complainant,

including evidence that the corrective action has been implemented.

POSTING ORDER (G0900)

The agency is ordered to post at its Marion, Illinois Penitentiary copies

of the attached notice. Copies of the notice, after being signed by the

agency's duly authorized representative, shall be posted by the agency

within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final,

and shall remain posted for sixty (60) consecutive days, in conspicuous

places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily

posted. The agency shall take reasonable steps to ensure that said

notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.

The original signed notice is to be submitted to the Compliance Officer

at the address cited in the paragraph entitled �Implementation of the

Commission's Decision,� within ten (10) calendar days of the expiration

of the posting period.

ATTORNEY'S FEES (H0900)

If complainant has been represented by an attorney (as defined by

29 C.F.R. � 1614.501(e)(1)(iii)), he/she is entitled to an award of

reasonable attorney's fees incurred in the processing of the complaint.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.501(e). The award of attorney's fees shall be paid

by the agency. The attorney shall submit a verified statement of fees

to the agency -- not to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

Office of Federal Operations -- within thirty (30) calendar days of this

decision becoming final. The agency shall then process the claim for

attorney's fees in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.501.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0501)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)

calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The

report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to

the complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement

of the order. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the

right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's

order prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement.

See 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(g).

Alternatively, the complainant has the right to file a civil action on

the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled

�Right to File a Civil Action.� 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407 and 1614.408.

A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying

complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c)

(1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the complainant files a civil action, the

administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for

enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.

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 (R0900)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date

that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. 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. 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

May 15, 2003

__________________

Date

This Notice is posted pursuant to an Order by the United States Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission dated which found that a

violation of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �791

et seq. has occurred at this facility.

Federal law requires that there be no discrimination against any

employee or applicant for employment because of that person's RACE,

COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, NATIONAL ORIGIN, AGE, or PHYSICAL or MENTAL

DISABILITY with respect to hiring, firing, promotion, compensation,

or other terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.

The United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons supports

and will comply with such Federal law and will not take action against

individuals because they have exercised their rights under law.

The United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons has been

found to have discriminated against the individual affected by the

Commission's finding. The United States Department of Justice, Bureau

of Prisons shall return the affected individual to duty with back pay

and benefits; pay compensatory damages; and pay attorney's fees and

costs. The United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons

will ensure that officials responsible for personnel decisions and

terms and conditions of employment will abide by the requirements of

all Federal equal employment opportunity laws and will not retaliate

against employees who file EEO complaints.

The United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons will not

in any manner restrain, interfere, coerce, or retaliate against any

individual who exercises his or her right to oppose practices made

unlawful by, or who participates in proceedings pursuant to, Federal

equal employment opportunity law.

_________________________

Date Posted: ____________________

Posting Expires: _________________

29 C.F.R. Part 1614

1Although complainant references a settlement, there is no evidence

of record that a settlement agreement was entered into in this case.

Rather, complainant appears to refer to the order of the AJ directing

the agency to reinstate him.

2The record does not contain documentation regarding a fitness-for-duty

examination subsequent to the AJ's decision.

3It is noted that, in the Federal employment system, accrued sick leave

has no cash value, but an employee's sick leave balance may impact terms

and conditions of employment in other ways; for example, with respect

to pension calculations.