05A30588_
05-29-2003
Teresita Saludez, Complainant, v. John W. Snow, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.
Teresita Saludez v. Department of the Treasury
05A30588
May 29, 2003
.
Teresita Saludez,
Complainant,
v.
John W. Snow,
Secretary,
Department of the Treasury,
Agency.
Request No. 05A30588
Appeal No. 01A22875
Agency No. 00-3269
Hearing No. 170-A1-8403X
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Teresita Saludez (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to
reconsider the decision in Teresita Saludez v. Department of the Treasury,
EEOC Appeal No. 01A22875 (February 12, 2003). EEOC Regulations
provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider any
previous Commission decision where the requesting party demonstrates
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. See 29
C.F.R. Sec. 1614.405(b).
After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, the previous
decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that the request
fails
to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1614.405(b), and it is the decision
of the Commission to deny the request. Here, following a hearing the
EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that the agency removed
complainant during her probationary period because of inadequate job
performance and not because of any discriminatory animus. Pursuant to
29 C.F.R. Sec. 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by an AJ
will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record.
Substantial evidence is defined as "such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Universal
Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474, 477
(1951) (citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not
discriminatory intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard
Co. v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982).
The AJ's finding regarding the lack of discriminatory intent on the
agency's part is supported by substantial evidence. Agency officials
testified about serious errors and omissions committed by complainant in
the course of performing her duties as a Customer Service Representative
for the Internal Revenue Service. They testified, for example, that they
had observed complainant giving incorrect tax forms to taxpayers, failing
to collect taxes owed by taxpayers, and failing to interact appropriately
with taxpayers seeking information. On the basis of this testimony, the
AJ could properly conclude that the agency had removed complainant
because of her poor performance and not for any prohibited
discriminatory reason.
For the foregoing reasons, the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01A22875
remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further right of
administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request
for reconsideration.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION
(P0900)
This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right of
administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. 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.
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. Sec. 2000e et seq.; the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. Secs. 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
May 29, 2003
__________________
Date