01A02559_r
07-12-2002
Lawrence A. Fibich, Complainant, v. Gale A. Norton, Secretary, Department of the Interior, Agency.
Lawrence A. Fibich v. Department of the Interior
01A02559
July 12, 2002
.
Lawrence A. Fibich,
Complainant,
v.
Gale A. Norton,
Secretary,
Department of the Interior,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A02559
Agency No. WBM-95-06
Hearing No. 100-96-7403X
DECISION
Complainant appealed to this Commission from the agency's final order
finding no discrimination in complainant's employment discrimination
complaint. The agency's final order adopted the summary judgment
findings of an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant, the Branch
Chief for Employee and Labor Relations at the agency's Bureau of Mines,
alleged discrimination on the bases of race (Caucasian), sex (male),
age, and in reprisal for prior EEO activity in violation of Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e
et seq. and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),
as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.
Previously, the Commission affirmed the agency's dismissal of a portion
of complainant's claims. See Fibich v. Department of the Interior. EEOC
01963931 (August 13, 1997).<1> The agency conducted an investigation of
the remaining claims, at the conclusion of which complainant requested
a hearing before an AJ. Upon consideration of the agency's motion for
summary judgment, and complainant's response, the AJ found no genuine
issues of material fact in dispute, nor any discrimination on a prohibited
basis. The agency accepted the AJ's decision, and complainant appealed.
In her decision, the AJ defined complainant's claims as follows, noting
that unless otherwise stated, the incidents occurred throughout 1991
- 1994:
(a) Complainant received unfair performance appraisal ratings;
Complainant was required to give excessive information to justify
his ratings;
Complainant's ratings did not reflect his accomplishments;
Complainant's appraisals were presented to him in an unfair manner;
During 1992 - 1994, complainant was denied training opportunities;
Complainant was denied the opportunity to act for the Chief;
Complainant was denied performance awards and Special Act/Achievement
awards;
(a) Complainant was given a disproportionate amount of assignments;
Complainant was given short time frames to complete his assignments;
Complainant was prevented for filing vacancies in his branch;
(a) Work-related information was withheld from him;
Complainant's supervisor belittled his work performance;
Complainant's supervisor undermined his authority;
On November 2, 1994, complainant was issued a letter of reprimand;
In 1994, complainant was subjected to different standards in the
processing and approval of his staff's performance appraisals;
Complainant was subjected to a number of racist and sexist comments;
(a) Complainant was directed to take action against male members of
his staff;
Complainant was accused of defending male members of his staff;
Complainant was denied access to his supervisor;
On November 2, 1994, complainant was issued a letter of reprimand; and
(a) Complainant was subjected to a number of racist and sexist comments;
Complainant was subjected to a pattern of discriminatory (hostile work
environment harassment) events as evidenced by the issues listed above.
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the grant
of summary judgment was appropriate, as no genuine dispute of material
fact exists. We find that the AJ's decision properly summarized the
relevant facts and referenced the appropriate regulations, policies,
and laws. Further, construing the evidence to be most favorable to
complainant, we note that complainant failed to present evidence that any
of the agency's actions were motivated by discriminatory animus toward
complainant's protected classes. Accordingly, the agency's decision
is AFFIRMED.
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
July 12, 2002
__________________
Date
1The Commission affirmed the dismissal
of two claims; they concerned being subjected to racist remarks from
complainant's supervisor during staff meetings, and being directed to
intercede in a termination involving a black male and a white supervisor.
See Fibich v. Department of the Interior, EEOC Appeal No. 01963931
(August 13, 1997).