Yanick Joseph, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 22, 2005
01a54743 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 22, 2005)

01a54743

11-22-2005

Yanick Joseph, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Yanick Joseph v. United States Postal Service

01A54743

November 22, 2005

.

Yanick Joseph,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A54743

Agency No. 1H-346-0035-03

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 discriminated against her on the

basis of sex (female), when in September 2003, she became aware that

her pay increase had been deferred. Specifically, complainant claimed

that her request for light duty, due to her pregnancy, had been denied.

Complainant further claimed that because she had been denied light duty,

she was subsequently off work for more than thirteen weeks on Leave

Without Pay, which resulted in her pay increase being deferred for

seven weeks.

At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant requested a hearing

before an EEOC administrative judge (AJ). However, in a letter dated

April 5, 2005, complainant withdrew her hearing request and asked for

a final agency decision.

The agency issued a decision finding no discrimination. The agency

determined that even if the evidence is viewed in light most favorable to

complainant, complainant failed to show that she was a victim of unlawful

workplace discrimination. Specifically, agency management stated that

complainant's medical restrictions required her to be seated, and there

was no seated work, at that time, in the facility. Further, at the

time of complainant's request, she was on full restrictions and only

able to walk and stand for one hour. The agency maintained that none

of complainant's comparators, who had previously received seated work,

had limitations that were as restrictive as complainant's. The agency

concluded that there is no evidence in this matter to infer unlawful

discrimination. The agency found that complainant failed to prove by

a preponderance of the evidence that the agency discriminated against her.

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 22, 2005

__________________

Date