0120093380
01-14-2010
Jacqueline S. Stenhouse, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Jacqueline S. Stenhouse,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120093380
Hearing No. 480-2008-00468X
Agency No. 4F-913-0005-08
DECISION
On July 24, 2009, complainant filed an appeal from a May 20, 2009 final
agency order concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint
alleging 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 deemed timely and is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �
1614.405(a). The Commission AFFIRMS the final agency order.
During the pertinent period, complainant worked as a City Carrier at
a Tarzana, California facility of the agency. She filed a formal EEO
complaint alleging that the agency discriminated against her on the
bases of race (African American), sex (female), and reprisal for prior
protected EEO activity when it subjected her to hostile work environment
harassment beginning with her return to work in September 2007 and
ultimately removed her from employment in January 2008.
Following an agency investigation of the above claim and receipt of a
copy of the report of investigation, complainant requested a hearing
before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Following a hearing, the AJ
issued a decision finding no discrimination. Specifically, the AJ found
"most of the [agency] actions complained of were responses by management
to complainant's job performance," and that such actions were appropriate
particularly because complainant was on a last chance agreement and
recently returned to work. The AJ found that complainant failed to show
that the agency's actions were based on statutorily protected classes.
Subsequently, the agency issued a final order implementing the AJ's
finding that complainant failed to prove that she was subjected to
discrimination as alleged. The instant appeal from complainant followed.
On appeal, complainant stated that management was aware of her prior
EEO activity, it forced her to sign a last chance agreement in August
2007 to get her job back, and persons outside her protected classes were
treated more favorably regarding discipline.
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.
Here, complainant alleged that she was subjected to hostile work
environment harassment and removal from employment based on discriminatory
motives. However, we find that complainant failed to show that the
agency's actions were based on her statutorily protected classes.
See Humphrey v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01965238
(October 16, 1998). We find that the AJ addressed complainant's
contentions previously and no reason to disturb the AJ's post-hearing
decision. We AFFIRM the final agency order finding no discrimination.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1208)
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 77960,
Washington, DC 20013. 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 (S0408)
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 (Z1008)
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
January 14, 2010
__________________
Date
2
0120093380
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
3
0120093380