01985432
07-25-2001
Alice Vranchik v. United States Postal Service
01985432
July 25, 2001
.
Alice Vranchik,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01985432
Agency No. 1C-151-1104-96
Hearing No. 170-97-8294X
DECISION
Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final order
concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of unlawful
employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq., the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �621 et seq.,
and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �791 et seq.
The appeal is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405. Complainant
alleges she was discriminated against on the bases sex, age, disability,
and reprisal when she was issued a Notice of Suspension for 14 Days
or Less for Failure to Follow Instructions. For the following reasons,
the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's final order.
The record reveals that complainant, a Data Collection Technician, PS-6,
at the agency's Pittsburgh General Mail Facility, filed a formal EEO
complaint with the agency on September 24, 1996, alleging that the agency
had discriminated against her as referenced above. At the conclusion
of the investigation, complainant received a copy of the investigative
report and requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ).
The AJ issued a decision without a hearing, finding no discrimination.
The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a prima facie case
of sex, age, or disability discrimination. The AJ found that complainant
failed to establish that she was an individual with a disability entitled
to protection under the Rehabilitation Act, and that even if she were,
she had failed to establish that she was treated differently than any
similarly situated non-disabled individual, nor any individual outside of
her protected sex and age groups. The AJ further found that complainant
had not established a prima facie case of reprisal discrimination, in
that the evidence of record established that the alleged discriminating
official was not aware of complainant's prior protected activity.
The AJ concluded that, even if complainant had established a prima facie
case, the agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for
its actions. The AJ found that the agency disciplined complainant for
being away from her work area without permission for one hour and five
minutes, and that other employees were similarly disciplined for similar
infractions. The AJ further found that complainant did not establish
that more likely than not, the agency's articulated reasons were a
pretext to mask unlawful discrimination and retaliation. The agency's
final order implemented the AJ's decision.
Complainant offers no contentions in support of her appeal. The agency
likewise offers no contentions in opposition to the appeal.
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the
Administrative Judge's issuance of a decision without a hearing was
appropriate, because there was no genuine issue of material fact to
be determined. The Commission further finds that the AJ's decision
properly summarized the relevant facts and referenced the appropriate
regulations, policies, and laws. The Commission notes that complainant
failed to present evidence that the agency's actions were in retaliation
for complainant's prior EEO activity or were motivated by discriminatory
animus toward complainant's sex, age, or claimed disability, and discern
no basis to disturb the AJ's decision. Therefore, after a careful review
of the record, it is the decision of the Commission to AFFIRM the agency's
final order.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0900)
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
July 25, 2001
_______________
Date