Mitchell J. Kurnik, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Southeast Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 14, 2005
01a54146 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 14, 2005)

01a54146

09-14-2005

Mitchell J. Kurnik, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Southeast Area), Agency.


Mitchell J. Kurnik v. United States Postal Service

01A54146

September 14, 2005

.

Mitchell J. Kurnik,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

(Southeast Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A54146

Agency No. 4H-335-0133-04

Hearing No. 150-2005-0094X

DECISION

Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final

decision concerning his equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of

unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �

791 et seq. The appeal is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's final

decision.

The record reveals that complainant, a Mail Processing Clerk at the

agency's Palm Harbor, Florida facility, filed a formal EEO complaint

on June 25, 2004, alleging that the agency discriminated against him

on the basis of disability when on April 20, 2004 he was given a new

job offer based on new physical restrictions without being consulted.

At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant received a copy

of the investigative report and requested a hearing before an EEOC

Administrative Judge but later withdrew his request. The agency issued

a final decision, finding no discrimination. Complainant did not submit

a statement in support of his appeal.

As an initial matter we note that, as this is an appeal from a FAD issued

without a hearing, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.110(b), the agency's

decision is subject to de novo review by the Commission. 29 C.F.R. �

1614.405(a). Upon review of the record, we note that complainant was

unhappy with the job offer because it changed his hours and his off days

and although he received �saved pay,� the job offer was for a level 05

position, and he had previously occupied a level 06 position. Complainant

was also clearly disappointed that he had not been consulted prior to be

given the offer. While we are sympathetic to complainant's situation,

we cannot find the agency liable for a violation of the Rehabilitation

Act because complainant has not established by a preponderance of the

evidence that he was a �qualified individual with a disability� during

the relevant time period. Specifically, even assuming that complainant

was an �individual with a disability,� he did not establish that there

was a vacant funded position for which he was qualified and to which he

could have been reassigned in lieu of the job offer that was made to him

in April 2004. As a result, his claim of disability discrimination fails,

and the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's final decision.

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 14, 2005

__________________

Date