Kelvin E. Baker, Petitioner,v.Mary E. Peters, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 24, 2008
0320080112 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 24, 2008)

0320080112

12-24-2008

Kelvin E. Baker, Petitioner, v. Mary E. Peters, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.


Kelvin E. Baker,

Petitioner,

v.

Mary E. Peters,

Secretary,

Department of Transportation,

Agency.

Petition No. 0320080112

MSPB No. AT0752070298I2

DECISION

On September 18, 2008, petitioner filed a timely petition with the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission asking for review of a Final Order

issued by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) concerning his claim

of discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of

1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.

Petitioner alleged that he was discriminated against on the bases of

race (Black), color (unspecified), and reprisal for prior protected

EEO activity under Title VII when he was demoted from the position of

Supervisory Air Traffic Control Specialist, AT-2152-LJ, to the position of

Air Traffic Control Specialist, AT-2152-LH, effective December 10, 2006.

The record reflects that the agency demoted petitioner based on the charge

of conduct unbecoming a supervisor. In its notice of proposed demotion,

the agency described its charge as follows:

Specifically, on February 10, 2006, at approximately 1:15 p.m., while

ascending the stairs in the rear stairwell, you and a subordinate's

shoulders collided. The subordinate, a controller at the tower, was

descending the stairs. You followed the subordinate down the stairs,

and in a loud and aggressive tone, stated something to the effect of

"I've been wanting this a long time. Let's step outside, you and

me, right now and finish this." Regardless of who bumped into whom,

your comments toward the subordinate concerning stepping outside were

completely inappropriate as a supervisor.

Further review of the record reveals that during prehearing conferences

with the parties on November 16 and 29, 2007, petitioner stipulated to

this characterization of the February 10, 2006 incident. The agency's

account of petitioner's conduct is further supported by the consistent

written statements of the subordinate involved and the Operations

Supervisor who overheard the altercation. The record also reveals that

petitioner has a history of "exhibiting an inability to get along with

others within and outside the agency."

Following a hearing, the Administrative Judge (AJ) found that the

testimony of agency officials was more credible than that of petitioner.

Of note, petitioner's immediate supervisor stated that several prior

attempts were made to correct petitioner's interpersonal behavior

with those in his work environment. Also, petitioner did not deny

his inappropriate behavior indicated in the record. With respect to

petitioner's claims of race, color and reprisal discrimination, the

AJ found that petitioner failed to show that agency officials were

motivated by discriminatory/retaliatory animus. The AJ noted that

the record supports the charges of misconduct brought by the agency.

In effect, petitioner failed to show a nexus between his EEO activity

and the agency's actions or that the actions were a pretext for unlawful

discrimination. Petitioner sought review by the full Board, but the

Board denied petitioner's petition for review. Thereafter petitioner

filed the instant petition with the Commission, where he made arguments

mainly asserting that a second-level supervisor, who is not responsible

for his demotion, conspired to retaliate against him.

EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction over

mixed case appeals on which the MSPB has issued a decision that makes

determinations on allegations of discrimination. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.303

et seq. The Commission must determine whether the decision of the

MSPB with respect to the allegation of discrimination constitutes a

correct interpretation of any applicable law, rule, regulation or policy

directive, and is supported by the evidence in the record as a whole.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.305(c).

Based upon a thorough review of the record, it is the decision of

the Commission to concur with the final decision of the MSPB finding

no discrimination. The Commission finds that the MSPB's decision

constitutes a correct interpretation of the laws, rules, regulations,

and policies governing this matter and is supported by the evidence in

the record as a whole.

PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (W0408)

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,

based on the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, within

thirty (30) calendar days of 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 (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

December 24, 2008

__________________

Date

Date

2

0320080112

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

3

0320080112