01a02883
07-17-2000
Patricia Flood-Williams, Complainant, v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.
Patricia Flood-Williams v. Social Security Administration
01A02883
July 17, 2000
Patricia Flood-Williams, )
Complainant, ) Appeal No. 01A02883
) Agency No. 98-0630-SSA
v. )
)
Kenneth S. Apfel, )
Commissioner, )
Social Security Administration, )
Agency. )
____________________________________)
DECISION
On March 1, 2000, Patricia Flood-Williams (hereinafter referred to as
complainant) initiated an appeal to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (Commission) with regard to her complaint of discrimination
in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.<1> The final agency decision was dated
February 4, 2000. Accordingly, the appeal is timely, and is accepted
by this Commission in accordance with 64 Fed.Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)
(to be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405).
The issue on appeal is whether complainant proved, by a preponderance of
the evidence, that she was discriminated against in reprisal for prior
EEO activity when she did not receive a Recognition of Contribution
(ROC) award for the period ending September 1997.
Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint in August 1998, raising the
above-referenced allegation of discrimination. The agency accepted
complainant's complaint for processing, and conducted an investigation.
The agency then provided complainant with a copy of the investigative
report and notified her of her right to request an administrative hearing
within 30 days. Complainant failed to respond within the 30-day period.
Thereafter, the agency issued a final decision finding that complainant
had not been subjected to discrimination as alleged. It is from this
decision that complainant now appeals.
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the
agency correctly determined that complainant was not subjected to
reprisal discrimination. The complaint herein presents the issue of
whether the agency subjected complainant to disparate treatment on the
basis of her prior EEO activity. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411
U.S. 792 (1973), provides an analytical framework for proving employment
discrimination in cases in which disparate treatment is alleged. First,
complainant must establish a prima facie case by presenting enough
evidence to raise an inference of discrimination. McDonnell Douglas,
supra, at 802. The agency may rebut complainant's prima facie case by
articulating legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its action, and
if the agency does so, complainant must show, by a preponderance of the
evidence, that the agency's reasons are a pretext for discrimination.
Id.
The Commission notes that the McDonnell Douglas analysis need not
be adhered to in all cases. In appropriate circumstances, when the
agency has established legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its
employment decision, the trier of fact may dispense with the prima
facie inquiry and proceed to the ultimate stage of the analysis,
that is, whether the complainant has proven by preponderant evidence
that the agency's explanations were a pretext for actions motivated by
prohibited discriminatory animus. See United States Postal Service Board
of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711 (1983). Given that the agency
acknowledged, in its final decision, that complainant established a
prima facie case, we will proceed with this analysis.
A review of the record reveals that the agency articulated a legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reason for complainant not having received the ROC
award, that is, the number of nominations greatly exceeded the number of
awards available. Further, the members of the awards panel all averred
that they adhered to guidelines provided by the Partnership Council,
and did not discuss or consider prior EEO activity. Complainant failed
to show that the agency's stated reasons were a pretext for prohibited
discrimination. Although she asserted that certain members of the panel
were intimidated, and that there was a conflict of interest, complainant
failed to provide any support for those contentions. Accordingly,
it is the decision of the Commission to AFFIRM the final agency decision.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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); 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 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).
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)
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:
__07-17-00_______ __________________________________
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 claimant, claimant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
_________________________ __________________________
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 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.