01a00326
04-17-2000
Carol G. Estepp, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Carol G. Estepp, )
Complainant, )
) Appeal No. 01A00326
v. ) Agency No. 1K-211-1086-96,
) 1K-211-1045-96
) Hearing No. 120-97-4327X,
) 120-97-4436X
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
)
DECISION
Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final decision
concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaints of unlawful
employment discrimination on the basis of sex (Female), in violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e
et seq.<1> Complainant alleges she was discriminated against when:
(1) on April 15, 1996, she was placed on Emergency Placement due to a
violent altercation with a female co-worker during which both complainant
and the co-worker made physical contact in front of her supervisor; and
(2) on July 8, 1996, as a result of the altercation, she was issued a
Notice of Removal for Unacceptable Conduct effective August 16, 1996.
The appeal is accepted pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)(to
be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405). For the following reasons, the
Commission affirms the agency's final decision.
The record reveals that complainant, a level 4 Mail Processor at the
agency's Frederick, Maryland Post Office, filed formal EEO complaints
with the agency on July 25, 1996 and September 18, 1996, alleging that
the agency had discriminated against her as referenced above.
At the conclusion of the investigations, complainant received a copy
of the investigative reports and requested a hearing before an EEOC
Administrative Judge (AJ). The complaints were consolidated into one
complaint before the AJ. Following the September 25, 1997 hearing,
the AJ issued a decision finding no discrimination.
The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a prima facie case
of sex discrimination because she failed to demonstrate that similarly
situated employees not in her protected class were treated differently
under similar circumstances when involved in a similar violent altercation
in front of a supervisor. In particular, the AJ noted that only one
male employee had been involved in a violent argument in front of a
supervisor and a removal action was initiated and retracted during the
investigation of the incident. Further, the AJ found that this sort of
conduct in front of a supervisor's presence demonstrated a great deal
of disrespect and disregard for management. The AJ then concluded that,
upon review of the record, complainant did not establish by preponderant
evidence that the agency's actions were unlawful discrimination.
The agency's final decision implemented the AJ's decision. From this
decision, complainant appeals. On appeal, complainant contends that
the AJ erred in his determination of complainant's actions during the
altercation at issue. Further, complainant claims that the AJ also
erred when he found that the agency's actions were not discriminatory.
Pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified at
29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a)), all post-hearing factual findings by an
Administrative Judge 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 that discriminatory intent
did not exist is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint,
456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982).
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the AJ's
decision summarized the relevant facts and referenced the appropriate
regulations, policies, and laws. We note that complainant failed to
present evidence that any of the agency's actions were motivated by
discriminatory animus toward complainant's sex. We discern no basis to
disturb the AJ's decision.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, after a careful review of the record, including complainant's
contentions on appeal and the agency's response, we affirm the agency's
final decision.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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 64
Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred
to as 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 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).
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)
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:
April 17, 2000
Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify
that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
Date
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.