Jimmie L. Wilson, Complainant,v.Robert M. Gates, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Army & Air Force Exchange Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 26, 2008
0120082763 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 26, 2008)

0120082763

08-26-2008

Jimmie L. Wilson, Complainant, v. Robert M. Gates, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Army & Air Force Exchange Service), Agency.


Jimmie L. Wilson,

Complainant,

v.

Robert M. Gates,

Secretary,

Department of Defense,

(Army & Air Force Exchange Service),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120082763

Agency No. AAFES No. 06.117

Hearing No. 461-2007-00049X

DECISION

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts complainant's

appeal from the agency's May 5, 2008 final order concerning his 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.

During the relevant time, complainant was employed as a Shift Manager,

Pay Band 3A, at the agency's Fort Polk Shoppette 1 located at Fort Polk,

Louisiana.

On August 10, 2006, complainant filed the instant formal complaint.

Therein, complainant alleged that the agency discriminated against him

on the basis of race (African-American) when effective July 28, 2006,

he was separated from employment on a charge of failing to check the

identification of an individual to whom he sold alcoholic beverages,

said individual being below 21 years of age.

On April 24, 2008, an Administrative Judge (AJ) of the Commission issued

a decision without a hearing, finding no discrimination. Therein,

the AJ found that complainant did not establish a prima facie case of

race discrimination. Moreover, the AJ found that even if complainant

had established a prima facie case of race discrimination, the agency

articulated legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its actions; and

that complainant did not establish that those reasons were pretextual.

On May 5, 2008, the agency issued a Notice of Final Order, implementing

the AJ's decision finding no discrimination.

The Commission's regulations allow an AJ to issue a decision without a

hearing when he or she finds that there is no genuine issue of material

fact. 29 C.F.R. �1614.109(g). This regulation is patterned after the

summary judgment procedure set forth in Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that summary judgment

is appropriate where a court determines that, given the substantive

legal and evidentiary standards that apply to the case, there exists

no genuine issue of material fact. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,

477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). In ruling on a motion for summary judgment,

a court's function is not to weigh the evidence but rather to determine

whether there are genuine issues for trial. Id. at 249. The evidence of

the non-moving party must be believed at the summary judgment stage and

all justifiable inferences must be drawn in the non-moving party's favor.

Id. at 255. An issue of fact is "genuine" if the evidence is such that

a reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non-moving party.

Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-323 (1986); Oliver v. Digital

Equipment Corporation, 846 F.2d 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988). A fact is

"material" if it has the potential to affect the outcome of a case.

If a case can only be resolved by weighing conflicting evidence, summary

judgment is not appropriate. In the context of an administrative

proceeding, an AJ may properly consider summary judgment only upon a

determination that the record has been adequately developed for summary

disposition.

After a review of the record in its entirety, including consideration

of all statements submitted on appeal, it is the decision of the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission to AFFIRM the agency's final order,

because the Administrative Judge's issuance of a decision without a

hearing was appropriate and a preponderance of the record evidence does

not establish that discrimination occurred.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0408)

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 (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 (Z0408)

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

August 26, 2008

Date

2

0120082763

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120082763