Pamela Bridges, Petitioner,v.Hershel W. Gober, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 18, 2000
04a00005 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 18, 2000)

04a00005

09-18-2000

Pamela Bridges, Petitioner, v. Hershel W. Gober, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Pamela Bridges v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs

04A00005

September 18, 2000

.

Pamela Bridges,

Petitioner,

v.

Hershel W. Gober,

Acting Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Petition No. 04A00005

Appeal No. 01975529

Agency No. 95-2069

Hearing No. 360-96-8682X

DECISION ON A PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT

On June 8, 2000, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or

Commission) docketed a petition for enforcement to examine the enforcement

of an Order set forth in Pamela Bridges v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs,

EEOC Appeal No. 01975529 (December 22, 1998).<1> This petition for

enforcement is accepted by the Commission pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503. Petitioner alleges that the agency failed to comply with

the Commission's Order by not including grade and step increases in its

computation of back pay.

In its prior Decision, the Commission affirmed the Administrative Judge's

finding that there was sufficient evidence that the agency discriminated

against petitioner when it failed to reinstate her. The Commission's

Order provided for the agency to determine the appropriate amount of back

pay, with interest, petitioner was entitled to. The Order also specified

that should petitioner be found fit for duty, the agency was ordered

to reinstate her to her previous position or an equivalent position

and should also conduct a supplemental investigation on the issue of

petitioner's entitlement to compensatory damages.<2> On October 26,

1999, petitioner submitted the petition for enforcement at issue.

In response to petitioner's petition regarding back pay, the agency

states that petitioner declined the agency's offer of reinstatement to

her previous position as a part-time Food Service Worker, WG-2, but found

a full-time GS-4 Medical Clerk position at a higher salary and benefits

with the agency in Georgia. As a result, the agency computed petitioner's

back pay for the period May 6, 1995 (the date after petitioner resigned

from the agency in Texas) through February 14, 1998 (the date she was

hired by the agency in Georgia). All interest and grade increases were

factored in to the back pay award as well as all applicable pay increases.

The net amount of back pay which petitioner was awarded was $29,075.05.

The agency has enclosed a spead sheet showing the total gross and net back

pay for the period of May 6, 1995 through February 14, 1998, as well as

the gross amount of interest petitioner was entitled to for these periods,

as proof that petitioner received the appropriate amount of back pay. The

agency stated that petitioner's back pay award calculation included

all applicable pay increases and any pay differentials attributable to

normal shift rotations she wold have earned. The agency stated that no

grade increases were included, as petitioner achieved the maximum step

level for her position, and that all applicable taxes were deducted from

the gross back pay. The agency also enclosed records of EEO training

for the selecting official and other management officials to address

their responsibilities with respect to eliminating discrimination in

the Federal workplace.

The documentation furnished by the agency indicates that as of February

9, 2000, complainant had received total compensation of $34,075.05,

including $20,516.62 for backpay, $3,559.43 for interest and $5,000.00

for compensatory damages. Complainant does not dispute that these

payments were made in a timely manner. After consideration of the

Commission's Order and the agency's submissions, we find that as the

agency included all applicable annual pay increases in calculating

petitioner's back pay award and as petitioner had achieved the maximum

step level for her position, the agency correctly calculated the amount

of back pay and interest to which petitioner was entitled. See, e.g.,

Bell v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Petition No. 04990022 (October

22, 1999). Accordingly, based on the agency actions as outlined above,

the Commission determines that the agency has complied with the Order set

forth in EEOC Appeal No. 01975529 (December 22, 1998), and the Petition

for Enforcement is therefore DENIED.

STATEMENT OF PETITIONER'S RIGHTS ON PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P1199)

This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right of

administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the right

to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court. 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 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.

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 18, 2000

__________________

Date

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 29 C.F.R Part 1614, 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 The agency found in a decision dated August 25, 1999, that petitioner

was entitled to $5,000.00 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages.

The Commission notes that complainant has filed a separate appeal with

the Commission regarding the issue of compensatory damages and as such

this Decision will address only the issue of back pay.