01982305
01-19-2000
Laurice J. Ibrahim, Complainant, v. William S. Cohen, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Finance & Accounting Service), Agency.
Laurice J. Ibrahim v. Department of Defense
01982305
January 19, 2000
Laurice J. Ibrahim, )
Complainant, )
) Appeal No. 01982305
v. ) Agency No. 95-037
) Hearing No. 170-96-8454X
William S. Cohen, )
Secretary, )
Department of Defense, )
(Defense Finance & Accounting Service), )
Agency. )
)
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final decision
concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of unlawful
employment discrimination on the bases of national origin (Egyptian),
sex (Female), and age (61), 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.<1> Complainant alleges she was discriminated against when:
(1) she was given an official Letter or Reprimand for failing to follow
instructions and discourteous conduct on June 21, 1995; (2) she was rated
"Highly Successful" on her annual performance rating received June 14,
1995; (3) she was forced to work in a hostile work environment in which
her supervisor allegedly would frequently and continuously yell at her;
(4) her supervisor tried to intimidate her by frequently throwing things
onto her desk; (5) her supervisor falsely accused her of destroying a
Lotus 1,2,3 Template; (6) her supervisor denied complainant training
opportunities in Pre-Retirement, Preparing Financial Statements, and
Accounts Receivable Reports; (7) her supervisor assigned her to new duties
without training her on how to preform her duties; (8) she was denied a
monetary award; (9) her supervisor continuously denied her overtime to
complete assigned work; (10) her supervisor denied her request to return
to a compressed work schedule; and (11) she was subjected to a hostile
work environment. The appeal is accepted in accordance with EEOC Order
No. 960.001. For the following reasons, the Commission affirms the
agency's final decision.
ISSUE PRESENTED
The issue presented herein is whether complainant has established, by
preponderant evidence, that the agency discriminated against her on the
bases of national origin, sex, and age.<2>
BACKGROUND
The record reveals that during the relevant time, complainant was
employed as a systems accountant at the Defense Finance & Accounting
Service's Bayonne, New Jersey facility. Complainant alleges that she
was subject to several acts of employment discrimination from June 1995
through September 1995. Believing she was a victim of discrimination,
complainant sought EEO counseling and, subsequently, filed a formal
complaint on September 29, 1995. An investigation was conducted by the
Office of Complaints Investigations, Columbia, Maryland and a report
was received by the agency on May 15, 1996.
At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant received a copy
of the investigative report(s) and requested a hearing before an EEOC
Administrative Judge (AJ) on June 4, 1996. Following the October 28, 1997
hearing, the AJ issued a Bench Decision on November 4, 1997, finding no
discrimination. The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a
prima facie case of racial, national origin, sex, and age discrimination
because she failed to demonstrate that similarly situated employees
not in her protected classes were treated differently under similar
circumstances regarding her various claims of employment discrimination.
Further, in the absence of appropriate comparative employees, the AJ
found that complainant failed to show any causal connection between her
protected group status and the employment actions at issue. The AJ
concluded that complainant failed to show by preponderant evidences
that she was subject to a hostile work environment based on her race,
national origin, sex, or age from June 1995 through September 1995.
Accordingly, the AJ recommended a finding of no discrimination.
The agency's final decision implemented the AJ's Bench Decision.
In this present appeal, complainant fails to raise any new contentions.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
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
recommended findings and conclusions properly summarized the relevant
facts and referenced the appropriate regulations, policies, and laws.
We conclude that complainant failed to establish by a preponderance
of the evidence that any of the agency's actions were motivated by
discriminatory animus toward complainant's age, national origin, or sex.
Accordingly, we discern no basis to disturb the AJ's recommended findings
and conclusions or the agency's adoption of the AJ's decision.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, after a careful review of the record, including complainant's
contentions on appeal, we AFFIRM the agency's FAD.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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). 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).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S1199)
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:
Jan 19, 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
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.
2 Although complainant also alleged discrimination on the basis of race
(Egyptian), the Commission notes that it considers the term "Egyptian"
to be a national origin rather than a racial group.