01975492
06-08-1999
Ronald J. Green, Appellant, v. Donna A. Tanoue, Chairwoman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (Resolution Trust Corporation), Agency.
Ronald J. Green v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
01975492
June 8, 1999
Ronald J. Green, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01975492
) Agency No. RTC-95-24
Donna A. Tanoue, ) Hearing No. 100-96-7306X
Chairwoman, )
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation )
(Resolution Trust Corporation), )
Agency. )
)
DECISION
Appellant timely appealed the final decision of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (agency), concerning his equal employment
opportunity (EEO) complaint of unlawful employment discrimination.
Appellant alleged that he was discriminated against on the bases of race
(African American), sex (male), and color (black) in violation of Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq.,
when he was suspended for five calendar days on December 16, 1994. The
appeal is accepted by the Commission in accordance with the provisions of
EEOC Order No. 960.001. For the following reasons, the agency's decision
is AFFIRMED.
Appellant filed a formal complaint alleging that the agency discriminated
against him as referenced above. At the conclusion of the agency's
investigation, appellant requested a hearing with an Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Administrative Judge (AJ). On April
14, 1997, the AJ issued a recommended decision without a hearing in
accordance with 29 C.F.R. �1614.109(e)(3). The agency subsequently
adopted the AJ's recommended decision in a final agency decision (FAD)
dated May 30, 1997.
In his recommended decision, the AJ found that appellant established
a prima facie case of disparate treatment discrimination on all bases
alleged. However, the AJ further determined that the agency sufficiently
rebutted appellant's prima facie case by articulating a legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reason for appellant's suspension. Specifically,
following an investigation, the responsible official (RO) determined that
appellant threatened to "fix" a coworker. The RO further concluded that
the coworker "had a reasonable basis for perception of a physical threat."
Therefore, agency officials noted the necessity of responding to potential
workplace violence. After acknowledging appellant's pretext argument,
the AJ determined that though the record indicated the investigation
of the incident which resulted in appellant's suspension was not ideal,
appellant failed to prove that a genuine issue of material fact existed
with respect to the agency's rationale. The AJ further determined that
appellant failed to present any evidence showing that race, color, or
his sex were factors considered in his suspension. Therefore, the AJ
finally concluded that appellant failed to provide any evidence to prove
that the agency's explanation was pretext for unlawful discrimination.
After a careful review of the entire record, including arguments and
evidence not specifically addressed in this decision, the Commission finds
that the AJ's recommended decision properly analyzed appellant's complaint
as a disparate treatment claim. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green,
411 U.S. 792 (1973); see also Texas Department of Community Affairs
v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253-56 (1981). The Commission concludes that,
in all material respects, the AJ accurately set forth the facts giving
rise to the complaint and the law applicable to the case. We further
find that the RO rebutted appellant's prima facie case and that appellant
failed to present any evidence which would show that the RO was more
likely than not motivated by a discriminatory animus when he issued
appellant's suspension. As appellant offered no additional persuasive
evidence in support of his claim on appeal, we discern no legal basis
to reverse the AJ's finding of no discrimination. Accordingly, it is
the decision of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to AFFIRM
the final agency decision finding no discrimination.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0795)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this
case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing
arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available
when the previous decision was issued; or
2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,
regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or
3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial
precedential implications.
Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST
BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this
decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive
a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in
opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider
MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party
WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request
to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments
must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received
by the Commission.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your
request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances
have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,
a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the
delay and 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. �l6l4.604(c).
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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:
June 8, 1999
DATE Carlton Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations