Sugery M. Cruz, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Southeast Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 4, 2002
01A14325 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 4, 2002)

01A14325

11-04-2002

Sugery M. Cruz, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Southeast Area), Agency.


Sugery M. Cruz v. United States Postal Service

01A14325

November 4, 2002

.

Sugery M. Cruz,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

(Southeast Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A14325

Agency No. 1-H-331-0038-99

DECISION

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

appeal from the agency's final decision in the above-entitled matter.

Complainant alleged that the agency had discriminated against her on

the bases of race (Caucasian), national origin (Hispanic), sex (female),

and religion (Catholic) when she was placed off the clock for refusing

to take a lie detector test in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.

Many of the pertinent facts are not in dispute. An agency manager

reported that he observed complainant attempting to clock-in

other employees in violation of agency policy. As a result of the

manager's report, the agency initiated an investigation. As part of the

investigation, the agency's inspectors asked complainant to submit to a

polygraph test. When complainant refused, the agency placed her off the

clock. Believing that she was discriminated against when she was placed

off the clock, complainant filed a formal complainant of discrimination.

Following an investigation, complainant requested a hearing before an

EEOC Administrative Judge. However, before the hearing could commence,

complainant withdrew her hearing request, and instead, requested an

immediate decision from the agency. On May 5, 2000, the agency issued a

decision concluding that complainant failed to establish discrimination

on any of her proffered bases. This appeal followed.

The prima facie inquiry may be dispensed with in this case since the

agency has articulated legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for its

conduct. See United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens,

460 U.S. 711, 713-17 (1983); Holley v. Department of Veterans Affairs,

EEOC Request No. 05950842 (November 13, 1997). Namely, the agency placed

complainant off the clock for refusing to submit to a polygraph test.

To ultimately prevail, complainant must prove, by a preponderance of the

evidence, that the agency's explanation is a pretext for discrimination.

Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 120 S.Ct. 2097

(2000); St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502, 519 (1993); Texas

Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 256 (1981);

Holley v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05950842

(November 13, 1997); Pavelka v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Request

No. 05950351 (December 14, 1995). In this case, complainant submits no

evidence that the agency's decision was based upon her race, national

origin, sex and/or religion. Complainant's bare assertions that the

agency discriminated against her when she was placed off the clock,

without more, is inadequate to establish that the agency's explanation

is a 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 decision

because the preponderance of the evidence of record 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

November 4, 2002

__________________

Date