Laurie Raines, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 4, 2002
01A22566_r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 4, 2002)

01A22566_r

09-04-2002

Laurie Raines, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Laurie Raines v. United States Postal Service

01A22566

September 4, 2002

.

Laurie Raines,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A22566

Agency No. 1-I-554-0041-00

Hearing No. 260-A1-9162X

DECISION

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

appeal from the agency's final order in the above-entitled matter. <1>

In her complaint, complainant, a mail-handler at the agency's

Minneapolis, Minnesota, Northland District, postal facility, claimed

discrimination on the bases of race (white), sex (female), age (50),

and disability (right elbow and arm) and in reprisal for prior protected

activity when on July 28, 2000, the agency placed her in Emergency Off

Duty Status following a contentious exchange with a Manager concerning

a hazardous condition report filed by complainant, and subsequently

issued her a letter of warning for her conduct during this exchange.

Complainant additionally claimed that the agency denied her request for

a union steward for her meeting with the aforementioned Manager.

The agency investigated the complaint, and transferred the case to an

EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) who rendered a decision without a hearing,

finding no discrimination. In reaching this conclusion, the AJ found that

even assuming arguendo that complainant established a prima face case of

discrimination on each basis she alleged, she failed to provide sufficient

evidence that the legitimate non-discriminatory reasons articulated by

the agency were a mere pretext for discrimination. The agency's final

order adopted the AJ's determination of no discrimination.

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

of all statements submitted on appeal, the Commission finds that the AJ

properly issued a decision without a hearing in this case, and we conclude

that the record supports the AJ's ultimate finding, that complainant

failed to prove discrimination by a preponderance of the evidence.

Accordingly, the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's final action.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0701)

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 (S0900)

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 (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

September 4, 2002

__________________

Date

1Commission records reflect that complainant filed the instant appeal

on April 9, 2002, prior to the agency's issuance of its final order on

April 18, 2002. Additionally, we note that the agency issued its final

order more than 40-days after its receipt of the Administrative Judge's

January 8, 2002 decision. Therefore, because the agency did not issue

a final action within 40-days of receipt of the administrative judge's

decision, the decision of the administrative judge is hereby deemed

to be the final action of the agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.109(i).

Accordingly, we find that complainant's appeal is proper and we accept

the appeal pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.