Paulette Butler, Complainant,v.Dr. Rebecca Blank, Acting Secretary, Department of Commerce (Bureau of the Census), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Feb 21, 2013

0120121154 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 21, 2013)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Paulette Butler,
Complainant,

v.

Dr. Rebecca Blank,
Acting Secretary,
Department of Commerce
(Bureau of the Census),
Agency.

Appeal No. 0120121154

Hearing No. 510-2011-00253X

Agency No. 10-63-01525D

DECISION

Complainant filed an appeal from the Agency’s final order dated November 21, 2011, finding
no discrimination with regard to her complaint. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM the
Agency’s final order.

BACKGROUND

In her complaint, dated May 28, 2010, Complainant alleged discrimination based on race
(African-American) and color (black) when on April 7, 2010, she was terminated. Upon
completion of the investigation of the complaint, Complainant requested a hearing before an
EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). On November 8, 2011, the AJ issued a decision without
holding a hearing, finding no discrimination. The Agency’s final order implemented the AJ’s
decision.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

The Commission’s regulations allow an AJ to issue a decision without a hearing when he or
she finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.109(g). This
regulation is patterned after the summary judgment procedure set forth in Rule 56 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that summary judgment
is appropriate where a court determines that, given the substantive legal and evidentiary
standards that apply to the case, there exists no genuine issue of material fact. Anderson v.
Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). In ruling on a motion for summary judgment,
0120121154

2
a court’s function is not to weigh the evidence but rather to determine whether there are
genuine issues for trial. Id. at 249. The evidence of the non-moving party must be believed at
the summary judgment stage and all justifiable inferences must be drawn in the non-moving
party’s favor. Id. at 255. An issue of fact is “genuine” if the evidence is such that a
reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non-moving party. Celotex v. Catrett, 477
U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp., 846 F.2D 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988).
A fact is “material” if it has the potential to affect the outcome of the case. In this case, we
find that the AJ properly issued a decision without a hearing because no genuine dispute of
material fact exists.

In the instant case, assuming arguendo that Complainant had established a prima facie case of
discrimination, the AJ determined that the Agency has articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory
reasons for the alleged incidents. During the relevant time period at issue, Complainant was
an Assistant Manager for Quality Assurance at the Agency’s Duluth Local Census Office in
Norcross, Georgia. On March 15, 2010, Complainant instructed her subordinate, Office
Operations Supervisor (OOS) to claim thirty minutes of overtime without an advance approval
by her Manager or Area Manager. Accordingly, the OOS submitted a D-308 Daily Payroll
Record to the Administration Department claiming the overtime for March 15, 2010, but he
later withdrew the overtime and resubmitted his payroll record for the regular eight hours. On
March 16, 2010, Complainant again instructed her subordinates, including the OOS, to claim
the overtime. However, after considering the Agency’s overtime policy, Complainant and the
subordinates agreed that they would leave early on Friday, March 19, 2010, in lieu of claiming
the overtime. Complainant maintained that on March 19, 2010, she informed her Manager
about her subordinates’ leaving early in lieu of the overtime and the Manager nodded his head
up and down indicating his approval. The Manager, however, denied the incident.

The Agency, undisputed by Complainant, indicated that under its overtime policy its
employees were not allowed to work more than 8 hours a day, 40 hours a week. If overtime
was necessary, the appropriate assistant manager must approve the overtime hours in advance,
otherwise they will be subject to termination. Here, the Agency stated that Complainant was
terminated during her probationary appointment due to her violation of the overtime policy and
misconduct, described above. Despite Complainant’s contentions on appeal, we find that
Complainant failed to show that she was treated less favorably than a similarly situated
employee under similar circumstances. After a review of the record, we agree with the AJ that
Complainant failed to rebut the Agency’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for her
termination. Based on the foregoing, we find that Complainant has failed to show that the
Agency’s action was motivated by discrimination as she alleged.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the Agency’s final order is AFFIRMED.

0120121154

3
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION

(M0610)
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), at 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 77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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

(S0610)
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

(Z0610)
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
0120121154

4
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

February 21, 2013
Date