01996406_r
04-04-2002
Elaine L. Owens, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Elaine L. Owens v. United States Postal Service
01996406
April 4, 2002
.
Elaine L. Owens,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01996406
Agency No. 4D-270-1128-96
Hearing No. 140-99-8040XRNS
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final agency
decision pertaining to her complaint of unlawful 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. The appeal is accepted pursuant
to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.
Complainant alleged she was discriminated against on the bases of race,
national origin and sex when an agency Postmaster failed to timely
respond to her suggestions made on January 31, 1995; April 11, 1995;
and September 12, 1995.
The record reveals that complainant, a Customer Relations Coordinator
at the agency's Raleigh, North Carolina facility, filed a formal EEO
complaint with the agency on December 11, 1996, alleging that the agency
had discriminated against her as referenced above. The agency dismissed
the complaint on July 1, 1997, for failure to contact an EEO Counselor in
a timely manner. On appeal, the Commission reversed the agency dismissal,
and remanded the complaint on the grounds that the EEO contact was timely
raised. On remand, the agency was specifically ordered to process the
remanded claims pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108. Owens v. United States
Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01975818 (May 5, 1998).
Following the Commission's May 5, 1998 decision, the agency concluded
its investigation and complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC
Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ issued a recommended decision without
a hearing, finding no discrimination.
The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a prima facie
case of race/national origin and sex discrimination. Specifically,
the AJ found that complainant demonstrated that she is a member of the
protected classes. However, the AJ found that complainant failed to
demonstrate that she was treated less favorably than similarly-situated
employees not in her protected classes. Furthermore, the AJ determined
that the individuals cited by complainant did not submit ideas warranting
cash awards and that complainant attempted to compare herself with
parties who are not acceptable comparatives, i.e., employees who have
received merit awards and/or participation awards. Finally, the AJ
found that complainant failed to establish that more likely than not,
the agency's articulated reasons for its actions were a pretext for
discriminatory animus.
On July 19, 1999, the agency adopted the AJ's recommendations and issued
a final decision finding no discrimination.
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 a discriminatory
intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard v. Swint,
456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982).
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the
AJ's decision properly summarized the relevant facts and referenced the
appropriate regulations, policies, and laws. We note that complainant
failed to present evidence that any of the agency's actions were motivated
by discriminatory animus toward her race/national origin and sex.<1>
Therefore, after a careful review of the record, including complainant's
contentions on appeal, the agency's response, and arguments and evidence
not specifically addressed in this decision, we AFFIRM the agency's
final decision.
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
April 4, 2002
__________________
Date
1The AJ noted that complainant highlighted various incidents that
occurred subsequent to her participation in a May 1995 newspaper article
addressing purportedly poor agency service. The AJ properly determined
that this matter, identified by complainant as �reprisal/harassment,� was
not raised in her formal complaint and therefore merited consideration
solely as background information.