01971348
02-01-2000
Martha J. Hegedus, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Martha J. Hegedus v. United States Postal Service
01971348
February 1, 2000
Martha J. Hegedus, )
Complainant, )
) Appeal No. 01971348
v. ) Agency No. 2-J-1014-92
) Hearing No. 240-92-5068X
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
)
)
DECISION
Complainant timely filed an appeal with the Commission from a final
decision of the agency concerning her complaint of unlawful employment
discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq.; and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, 29 U.S.C. �791.<1> The appeal is accepted in accordance with
EEOC Order No. 960, as amended. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)
(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)).
Complainant filed a complaint in which she alleged that the agency
discriminated against her on the bases of race and color (red), national
origin (Native American), gender, physical disability (on-the-job shoulder
injury), and reprisal by:
Giving her limited duty assignments that exceeded her medical
restrictions;
Failing to provide her physician with accurate information regarding
limited duty positions;
Charging her with eight days of absence-without-leave (AWOL) in October
1991;
Failing to provide her with a permanent limited duty assignment; and
Repeatedly requesting medical documentation from her between October
1991 and March 1992.
The agency investigated the complaint and referred the matter for a
hearing, pursuant to which an administrative judge (AJ) recommended a
finding of no discrimination. The agency subsequently adopted the AJ's
recommendation as its final decision, which complainant appealed. In an
earlier decision on this case, Martha J. Hegedus v. Marvin T. Runyon,
Jr., Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal
No. 01945572 (March 25, 1996), the Commission vacated the agency's
final decision because certain hearing exhibits were missing from
the appeal file. It ordered the agency to supplement the record with
the hearing exhibits in question, and to issue a new final decision.
Pursuant to the Commission's order, the agency retrieved the necessary
documents and issued a second final decision of no discrimination. It
is from this decision that complainant now appeals.
The AJ found that complainant failed to establish that the long-term
effects of her shoulder so substantially limited any of her major
life activities as to constitute a disability. She also found that
the agency articulated legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons
for each personnel action that complainant alleged to be unlawful.
The AJ ultimately concluded that complainant failed to prove that any
of the agency's reasons were pretexts for discrimination or reprisal.
Complainant has not submitted a brief or statement in support of her
appeal. We therefore find that the AJ accurately summarized the facts
of this case, and that her findings and conclusions are consistent with
Commission policy and precedent.
After a review of the record, including consideration of the hearing
exhibits submitted by the agency and all statements submitted on appeal,
it is the decision of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to
AFFIRM the agency's final decision because the evidence of record does
not establish that discrimination occurred. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644,
37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29
C.F.R. �1614.405(a)).
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:
Feb. 1, 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 of mailing. I certify that
the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
_________________________ __________________________
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.