Barbara Brown, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (N.E./N.Y. Areas), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 29, 2000
05a00045 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 29, 2000)

05a00045

03-29-2000

Barbara Brown, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (N.E./N.Y. Areas), Agency.


Barbara Brown v. United States Postal Service

05A00045

March 29, 2000

Barbara Brown, )

Complainant, )

) Request No. 05A00045

v. ) Appeal No. 01984423

) Agency No. 4A-110-0027-97

William J. Henderson, ) Hearing No. 160-97-8751X

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service )

(N.E./N.Y. Areas), )

Agency. )

)

DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

On 10/8/99, Barbara Brown (complainant) initiated a request to the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (Commission) to reconsider the decision

in Barbara Brown v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01984423

(9/10/99).<1> EEOC Regulations provide that the Commissioners may,

in their discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision.

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b)). The party

requesting reconsideration must submit written argument or evidence which

demonstrates that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous

interpretation of material fact or law; or the decision will have a

substantial impact on the policies, practices or operations of the

agency. Complainant's request is denied.

Complainant alleged in her complaint that the agency discriminated

against her on the bases of race (Black), color (black), sex (female)

or age (DOB: 10/6/38), when she was issued an Emergency Placement into

off-duty status as a result of money order discrepancies on October 28,

1996, and was eventually removed. Complainant requested a hearing before

an EEOC administrative judge. Finding there were no genuine issues

of material fact in dispute, the AJ issued findings and conclusions

without a hearing. Specifically, the AJ found complainant failed to

establish that similarly situated individuals outside of her protected

classes were treated differently after committing similar offenses.

The AJ noted that other employees who were charged with misappropriating

funds were also terminated from employment. Although complainant argued

that others had monetary discrepancies and were not terminated, the AJ

found that complainant's allegation in this regard was not substantiated

by the evidence in the record.

In her request, complainant does not dispute the charges. Rather, she

argues that others committed similar offenses and were not terminated from

employment. As the AJ noted, complainant failed to produce sufficient

documentary or testimonial evidence substantiating her allegation that

others who misappropriated funds from the agency were not similarly

terminated.

After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, the previous

decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds complainant's

request does not meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and

it is the decision of the Commission to deny complainant's request.

The decision of the Commission in EEOC Appeal No. 01984423 remains the

Commission's final decision. There is no further right of administrative

appeal from a decision of the Commission on a request for reconsideration.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P1199)

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. � 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,

March 29, 2000

_______________ ______________________

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal

sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply to all

federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative

process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations

found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at WWW.EEOC.GOV.