01a03162
08-02-2000
Joel V. Polk, Jr. II Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Joel V. Polk, Jr. II v. United States Postal Service
01A03162
August 2, 2000
Joel V. Polk, Jr. II )
Complainant, )
) Appeal No. 01A03162
v. ) Agency No. 4-G-770-0252-99
) Hearing No. 330-A0-8047X
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
______________________________)
DECISION
The complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final action
concerning his equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of unlawful
discrimination on the bases of sex (male) and age (43), in violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e
et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),
as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. The complainant alleged that he
was discriminated against when he was terminated from his Letter Carrier
position after his probationary period for unsatisfactory work performance
and being involved in a preventable automobile accident . Pursuant to 64
Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405),
the Commission accepts the complainant's appeal from the agency's final
action dated February 25, 2000, in the above-entitled matter.<1>
An EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ), without a hearing, found that
the agency had articulated legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for
terminating the complainant during his probationary period. The AJ
further found, inter alia, that the complainant failed to show that
other individuals had been treated differently than he in similar
circumstances. Moreover, the AJ found no evidence that the agency
terminated the complainant because of his sex or age. Accordingly, the
AJ found that the agency did not discriminate against the complainant.
The agency issued a final action implementing the AJ's decision.
On appeal, the complainant restates his arguments made below and alleges
the AJ erred in her factual findings. Specifically, the complainant
argues that the AJ erred in finding that he was terminated during his
probationary period. The agency made no comments in response to the
appeal.
The record reveals that the complainant was appointed to a Letter Carrier
position effective November 7, 1998, with a 90-day probationary period.
We note that a 90-day probationary period therefore would end on February
5, 1999. We further note that the record shows that the effective date of
the complainant's termination was February 6, 1999. In the AJ's decision,
she stated that it appeared that the complainant was terminated on the
last day of his probationary period. We agree with the complainant that
this statement appears to be in error. However, we conclude that while
the probationary period appears to have ended prior to his removal, we do
not find that this error affected the finding that the complainant failed
to prove that the removal was for discriminatory reasons. See Hines
v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05960667 (March 26, 1998),
fn. 1. ("harmless error" is an error "whose existence has no impact on
the outcome of the case").
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 action
dated February 25, 2000, because the AJ's issuance of a decision without
a hearing was appropriate and a preponderance of the record evidence
does not establish that discrimination occurred.
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:
August 2, 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.