01a23676_r
09-26-2002
Konny K. Karns Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Konny K. Karns v. United States Postal Service
01A23676
September 26, 2002
.
Konny K. Karns
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A23676
Agency Nos. 4C-430-0077-01 & 4C-430-0088-01
DECISION
The record indicates that complainant filed an appeal from the agency's
decision, dated May 22, 2002, concerning her complaints of unlawful
employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. In her
complaints, dated July 26 and 27, 2001, complainant alleged that she was
discriminated against in reprisal for prior EEO activity when on May 9,
2001, she was put on emergency placement in an off duty status and on
June 26, 2001, she was given a Notice of Removal. The record, undisputed
by complainant, indicates that at the conclusion of the investigation,
complainant was informed of her right to request a hearing. Complainant
did not make such request, and the agency issued its decision finding
no discrimination.
The agency determined that complainant failed to establish a prima facie
case of discrimination in reprisal. The agency also concluded that
it articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions.
Complainant's Postmaster and other supervisors indicated that on May 3,
2001, it was discovered that complainant had first class mail buried
beneath third class mail and did not report it to any supervisor. On May
9, 2001, while attempting to investigate the delay of first class mail,
complainant made several derogatory statements that led the Postmaster
to believe complainant was going to harm her. Specifically, complainant
made remarks to the Postmaster that she wanted to �jump on her back,�
�you are going to be sorry,� �a witch,� �a liar,� and �psycho.� The
Postmaster placed complainant on suspension and, subsequently, removed
her for delaying first class mail and improper conduct.
Complainant stated that her union steward told her that the Manager, Labor
Relations, knew about her prior EEO complaint. Complainant argued that
it was the Manager who was responsible for making the decision to issue
her the Notice of Removal. In response, the Manager stated that he was
not aware of complainant's prior EEO complaint. The Manager denied making
any decision to take the alleged action. The Manager stated that he gave
his professional advice to the Postmaster when she asked him whether her
action was warranted based on the evidence she had. The agency determined
that complainant did not establish that more likely than not, the agency's
articulated reasons were a pretext to mask unlawful retaliation.
After a review of the record in its entirety, including consideration
of all statements submitted on appeal, the agency's decision is hereby
AFFIRMED because a preponderance of the record evidence does not establish
that discrimination occurred.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0701)
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
September 26, 2002
__________________
Date