Rayford J. Wright, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 16, 2009
0120080179 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 16, 2009)

0120080179

04-16-2009

Rayford J. Wright, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Rayford J. Wright,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120080179

Agency No. 4G-720-0113-06

Hearing No. 490-2007-00048X

DECISION

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

appeal from the agency's September 20, 2007, final order concerning

his 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., Section 501 of the

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

791 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 him on the bases of race (Black), color (black),

sex (male), disability (Mental), and age (45) when on July 5, 2006,

he was terminated during his probationary period.

The record reveals that following an investigation by the agency,

complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge

(AJ). The AJ however, issued a decision without a hearing finding

no discrimination. The AJ found that the agency had articulated a

legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its action. Specifically, the

agency explained that complainant was terminated during his probationary

period because he received unacceptable ratings at the 30, 60 and 80

day review periods. To show pretext, complainant argued that he was

terminated because management did not like him and because they wanted

him removed from the agency after a sexual harassment complaint was

filed against him by an agency employee. The AJ found that other than

complainant's own assertions regarding his termination he provided no

evidence which showed that the agency's articulated reason was pretext

for discrimination.

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. The Commission finds that even assuming arguendo that complainant

established a prima facie case of discrimination as to all bases,

we agree that complainant failed to show that the agency's legitimate

nondiscriminatory reason, namely that complainant received unacceptable

ratings with regard to his work performance and was therefore terminated,

was pretext for discrimination. In fact, we find there is no evidence

in the record which suggests that his race, color, sex, disability, or

age were considered with regard to his removal. Further, we note that

complainant argues that due to the stress of the sexual harassment charges

filed against him his mental disability was aggravated thus affecting

his work performance. We find his conclusory argument irrelevant to the

outcome of this case because management was unaware that complainant

had a disability, and complainant never requested an accommodation.

Accordingly, we find the Administrative Judge's issuance of a decision

without a hearing was appropriate and a preponderance of the record

evidence does not establish that discrimination occurred.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1208)

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 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 (S0408)

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 (Z1008)

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 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

04/16/09

__________________

Date

3

0120080179

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013