Mary R. Taylor, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 21, 1999
01973851 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 21, 1999)

01973851

09-21-1999

Mary R. Taylor, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Mary R. Taylor v. United States Postal Service

01973851

September 21, 1999

Mary R. Taylor, )

Appellant, )

) Appeal No. 01973851

v. ) Agency No. 4-G-760-1045-95

)

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

)

)

DECISION

Appellant 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 the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

of 1967, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. The appeal is accepted in accordance

with EEOC Order No. 960, as amended. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.402(a).

Appellant filed a complaint in which she alleged that the agency

discriminated against her on the bases of age (40) and gender by not

re-appointing her to a third term as a temporary letter carrier. Her

appointment was terminated, effective October 6, 1995.

To prevail on her claim, appellant must satisfy the three-part test

fashioned by the United States Supreme Court. She must initially

establish a prima facie case of discrimination. The burden then shifts

to the agency to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for

the acts forming the bases of the complaint. Finally, appellant must

show that the agency's articulated reason for its actions was merely a

pretext for illegal discrimination. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green,

411 U.S. 792, 802-05 (1973).

We disagree with the agency that appellant failed to establish a prima

facie case. The record establishes that appellant was not given a

third consecutive temporary appointment while a 27-year-old white male

temporary carrier was given a third consecutive appointment. We find

this more than sufficient to establish a prima facie case. We also find

that the customer services manager articulated the agency's reason for

not rehiring her: appellant had been counseled on numerous occasions

with regard to her performance. In her affidavit, the customer services

manager outlined ten instances between December 1993 and September 1995,

in which appellant was given a discussion regarding unsatisfactory

performance. Those incidents included: failure to complete assigned

duties; leaving the driver door open while making a U-turn; speeding;

leaving her vehicle unlocked and unattended, with mail; misdelivery of

mail; and other incidents. Appellant has not addressed these findings

in her appeal statement, nor has she presented any documents or testimony

which contradicts the manager's statement or undermines her credibility as

a witness. Although the record includes letters from customers attesting

to the positive side of appellant's performance, these letters do not

contradict the customer service manager's account.

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 decision

because the preponderance of the evidence of record does not establish

that discrimination occurred.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in the

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)

It is the position of the Commission that 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 the decision.

You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have

interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that

a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the

date that you receive the decision. To ensure that your civil action is

considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS from the date that you receive the decision or to consult an attorney

concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction in which your

action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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:

Sept. 21, 1999

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations