Fay L. Johnson, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 3, 2000
01a02550 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 3, 2000)

01a02550

08-03-2000

Fay L. Johnson, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Fay L. Johnson v. USPS

01A02550

August 3, 2000

.

Fay L. Johnson,

Complainant,

v.

William J. Henderson,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A02550

Agency No. 4G-700-1157-95

Hearing No. 270-97-9046X

DECISION

On February 8, 2000, complainant timely initiated an appeal from

the agency's final action, dated January 7, 2000, 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.<1> The appeal is accepted

pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)(to be codified at 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405).

Complainant alleges she was discriminated against on the basis of race

(black) when on January 21, 1995, she became aware that a delivery route

had been awarded to a white applicant, as a result of a re-posting of

the bid. For the following reasons, the Commission affirms the agency's

final action of January 7, 2000.

The record reveals that complainant, a Rural Carrier Associate (RCA) at

the agency's Woodlawn Station facility, filed a formal EEO complaint with

the agency on July 5, 1995, alleging that the agency had discriminated

against her as referenced above. Specifically, complainant claimed that

she placed a bid on the original November 15, 1994 posting for a rural

route position in order to be awarded a residual route. Before the

jobs could be awarded, a union representative became aware that the

posting improperly considered applications solely of regular route

carriers, and not those of both regular and rural carrier associates,

such as complainant. On December 12, 1994, a corrected announcement

was posted that allowed both regular and associate carriers to apply.

Complainant alleges that but for the re-posting, she would have received

the position, that was given instead to a white female associate carrier.

At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant requested a hearing

before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Following a hearing, the AJ

issued a decision finding no discrimination.

The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a prima facie

case of race discrimination. The AJ found complainant to be a member

of a protected class because of her race. However, the AJ found that

complainant failed to demonstrate that similarly situated employees

not in her protected class were treated differently under similar

circumstances, when a white woman with more seniority received the

position in contention. The AJ noted that the National Letter Carriers'

Association agreed with the agency's assessment that if the position

is still vacant, it shall be awarded to an RCA with the longest

continuous service unless another RCA has demonstrated substantially

better qualifications. The AJ determined that because the successful

applicant for the subject position began working for the agency on January

28, 1989, while complainant began in September 1990, complainant cannot

demonstrate a nexus between her race and the award of the position to a

woman with more seniority, who is white. The AJ further concluded that

the agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its

actions and properly corrected the posting error and gave the position

to the candidate with more seniority. The AJ found that complainant

did not establish that more likely than not, the agency's articulated

reasons were a pretext to mask unlawful discrimination and that the

agency properly awarded the position to the more senior candidate.

The agency's final action of January 7, 2000 implemented the AJ's

decision.

Complainant makes no new contentions on appeal, and the agency requests

that we affirm its final decision.

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).

The Commission finds that the AJ's decision properly 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 race. We discern no basis to disturb the AJ's

decision. Therefore, after a careful review of the record, including

complainant's contentions on appeal, the agency's response, and arguments

and evidence not specifically addressed in this decision, we AFFIRM the

agency's final January 7, 2000.

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.

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:

August 3, 2000

____________________________

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

1 On 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.