01972851
02-23-2000
Geraldine Bright, Complainant, v. Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.
Geraldine Bright v. Department of the Navy
01972851
February 23, 2000
Geraldine Bright,
Complainant,
v.
Richard J. Danzig,
Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01972851
Agency No. 94-65923-012
Hearing No. 140-95-8083X
DECISION
Complainant timely initiated an appeal to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (Commission or EEOC) from a final agency decision (FAD)
concerning her claim that the agency discriminated against her in
violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. and the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), 29
U.S.C. � 206(d).<1> Complainant alleged that she was discriminated
against on the basis of sex (female), based on her perception that
she was performing work at the same grade level as a male co-worker,
but she was not being paid commensurate with her work. The Commission
hereby accepts the appeal in accordance with EEOC Order No. 960.001.
For the reasons that follow, the FAD is AFFIRMED.
At the time of the alleged discriminatory event, complainant was employed
as a data clerk at the Naval Aviation Depot, Marine Corps Air Station,
Cherry Point, North Carolina. Believing that she was the victim of
discrimination, complainant sought EEO counseling and, thereafter,
filed a formal EEO complaint. The agency accepted the complaint for
investigation and complied with all of our procedural and regulatory
prerequisites. Subsequently, complainant requested a hearing before
an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ), which was held on July 9, 1996.
On December 3, 1996, the AJ issued a Recommended Decision (RD) finding no
discrimination. In her RD, the AJ concluded that complainant failed to
establish a prima facie case of discrimination in violation of the EPA.
Specifically, the AJ reasoned that while complainant established that
she received lower pay than a male co-worker under similar working
conditions, she failed to show that her work required skill, effort,
and responsibility equal to that of her male co-worker. Thereafter, the
agency adopted the RD and issued a FAD, dated January 10, 1997, finding
no discrimination. It is from this agency decision that complainant
now appeals. No contentions were submitted on appeal.
Pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified at
29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a)), all post-hearing factual findings by an
Administrative Judge 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 which will be upheld
if supported by substantial evidence. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint,
456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982).
After careful review of the entire record, including arguments and
evidence not specifically addressed in this decision, the Commission finds
that the AJ's RD presented the relevant facts, and properly analyzed
the appropriate regulations, policies and laws. The Commission discerns
no basis to disturb the AJ's finding. Accordingly, the FAD is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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
64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405). 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999)
(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 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 (S1199)
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.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION-EQUAL PAY ACT (Y1199)
You are authorized under section 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act
(29 U.S.C. � 216(b)) to file a civil action in a court of competent
jurisdiction WITHIN TWO YEARS or, if the violation is willful, THREE YEARS
of the date of the alleged violation of the Equal Pay Act regardless of
whether you have pursued any administrative complaint processing. The
filing of the 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:
February 23, 2000
_________________________
Date Frances M. Hart
Executive Officer
Executive Secretariat
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify
that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
Date
Equal Employment Assistant
1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal
sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply to all
federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative
process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations
found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at WWW.EEOC.GOV.