0120070836
05-11-2007
Paula Pendergraph, Complainant, v. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary, Department of State, Agency.
Paula Pendergraph,
Complainant,
v.
Condoleezza Rice,
Secretary,
Department of State,
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120070836
Agency No. DOS-F-052-05
Hearing No. 100-2006-00243X
DECISION
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts complainant's
appeal from the agency's November 20, 2006 final order concerning
her 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., and the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �
621 et seq. Complainant alleged that the agency discriminated against
her on the bases of race (African-American) and age (D.O.B. 11/07/59)
when her candidacy for a position as a Foreign Service Office Management
Specialist (OMS) was terminated on August 2, 2004.
The EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) initially found that the Agency's
Motion for Summary Judgment correctly stated the material facts
and applicable legal standards of the case, and found there were no
genuine issues of material fact which required resolution at a hearing.
As such, the AJ granted the Agency's Motion. The AJ further found that
the Agency's Motion correctly stated that the record demonstrated the
agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions,
namely, that there was no credible evidence in the record of either age or
race discrimination with regard to the process used to select qualified
candidates for the position at issue. The AJ found that E1 provided
numerous reasons for her decision to not forward complainant's application
as a qualified applicant for the position at issue. Specifically, E1
stated that in her professional opinion, complainant's Qualification
Determination Sheet used in connection with her application, and her
percentage of specialized and general secretarial experience in her
prior positions indicated that she lacked the necessary concentration
of secretarial skills and thus was not the best fit for the position.
AJ's Decision at 2. The record further indicates that E1 stated that she
was not aware of complainant's race from her application, and the record
indicates that the agency hired over 30 employees over the age of 40 for
the OMS position for which complainant applied. Investigative Report,
at Exhibit 5C.
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 appropriate1 and a preponderance of the record evidence does
not establish that discrimination occurred.
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
____5/11/07_______________
Date
1 In the context of an administrative proceeding, an AJ may properly
consider issuing a decision without a hearing only upon a determination
that the record has been adequately developed for summary disposition.
See Petty v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 01A24206 (July 11,
2003); Murphy v. Dept. of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01A04099 (July 11,
2003).
??
??
??
??
2
0120070836
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C. 20036
3
0120070836