04a40045
10-29-2004
Gary Christian, Petitioner, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Gary Christian v. United States Postal Service
04A40045
October 29, 2004
.
Gary Christian,
Petitioner,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Petition No. 04A40045
Appeal No. 01971770
Agency No. 4C-190-1073-94
Hearing No. 170-95-8383X
DECISION ON A PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT
On September 20, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC or Commission) docketed a petition for enforcement to examine the
enforcement of an order set forth in Gary Christian v. United States
Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01971770 (March 10, 1999). 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 dated September 26, 2000.
Petitioner filed a complaint in which he alleged that the agency
discriminated against him on the basis of his disability (learning
disability). Petitioner appealed the agency's final decision finding
no discrimination to the Commission. In EEOC Appeal No. 01971770, the
Commission found that the agency discriminated against complainant by
terminating his employment, and failing to provide him with a reasonable
accommodation for his disability.<1>
The order also required that the agency offer petitioner reinstatement
with back pay, interest and other benefits lost due to the discrimination.
The matter was assigned to a Compliance Officer and docketed as Compliance
No. 06A10056 on October 11, 2000.
On September 20, 2004, petitioner submitted the petition for enforcement
at issue. Petitioner contends that the agency failed to correctly
calculate the amount of leave he lost, and the correct amount of Thrift
Savings Plan (TSP) adjustments and also failed to reimburse out-of-pocket
medical expenses. According to the record, petitioner was reinstated to a
position with the agency effective October 6, 2001. The agency submitted
documentation which explained that due to petitioner's reinstatement and
back pay award, he was given health insurance coverage retroactive to
1993. Any bills he received for medical treatment during this period of
time should have been submitted to the health insurer for reimbursement.
Petitioner did not indicate that he was refused reimbursement as a result
of being denied coverage. Therefore, the Commission cannot conclude that
the agency is not in compliance with its order to provide lost benefits
in the form of health insurance coverage.
Petitioner disputes the agency's calculation of lost annual and sick leave
arguing that he is due to receive credit for additional hours. (59.27 of
annual and 60 of hours sick leave). However, he has not demonstrated how
the agency has erred or that his calculations are correct.<2> Therefore,
without more specific evidence of non-compliance, the Commission concludes
the agency's calculations are correct.
Finally, petitioner argues that the maximum allowable deductions and
agency contributions were not contributed to his TSP account from a time
period post dating his reinstatement to his employment. (October 6, 2001
to August 8, 2002.) Petitioner has not adequately explained how this
period of time after his reinstatement relates to the discriminatory
conduct or how the agency's calculations were incorrect. Therefore,
without more specific documentation, the Commission concludes that the
agency's calculations regarding petitioner's TSP account are accurate
and comply with our Order.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Commission concludes that the petition
should be denied as the agency has complied with Order for make whole
relief .
PETITIONER'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
October 29, 2004
__________________
Date
1The agency's request to reconsider was denied
in EEOC Appeal No. 05990583 (September 26, 2000).
2The agency acknowledged certain errors in calculations but concluded
that a correction resulted in a credit of 40.27 hours of annual leave
and 24 hours of sick leave.