[Redacted], Barbara C., 1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.

15 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,440 times 95 Legal Analyses
Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision
St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks
509 U.S. 502 (1993) Cited 12,287 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination
Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine
450 U.S. 248 (1981) Cited 20,012 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding in the Title VII context that the plaintiff's prima facie case creates "a legally mandatory, rebuttable presumption" that shifts the burden of proof to the employer, and "if the employer is silent in the face of the presumption, the court must enter judgment for the plaintiff"
U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens
460 U.S. 711 (1983) Cited 2,407 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination
Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters
438 U.S. 567 (1978) Cited 2,165 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a district court was "entitled to consider the racial mix of the work force when trying to make the determination as to motivation" in the employment discrimination context
Henson v. City of Dundee
682 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1982) Cited 977 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that where a supervisor makes sexual overtures to employees of both genders, or where the conduct is equally offensive to male and female workers, the conduct may be actionable under state law, but it is not actionable as harassment under Title VII because men and women are accorded like treatment
Widmar v. Sun Chem. Corp.
772 F.3d 457 (7th Cir. 2014) Cited 194 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "speculat[ion] as to the employer's state of mind" is not sufficient to defeat summary judgment
Section 2000e - Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e Cited 51,702 times 129 Legal Analyses
Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions
Section 1614.107 - Dismissals of complaints
29 C.F.R. § 1614.107 Cited 472 times 5 Legal Analyses
Explaining the notice requirements for partial dismissal of claims in an EEO complaint
Section 1614.302 - Mixed case complaints
29 C.F.R. § 1614.302 Cited 402 times 2 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that once a formal appeal or complaint is filed in either forum, it "shall be considered an election to proceed in that forum"
Section 1614.110 - Final action by agencies
29 C.F.R. § 1614.110 Cited 226 times 1 Legal Analyses
Compelling final decision “within 60 days of the end of the 30-day period for the complainant to request a hearing . . . where the complainant has not requested [one]”
Section 1614.108 - Investigation of complaints
29 C.F.R. § 1614.108 Cited 179 times 2 Legal Analyses
Describing inquisitorial nature of investigation process
Section 1614.405 - Decisions on appeals
29 C.F.R. § 1614.405 Cited 81 times 3 Legal Analyses
Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"
Section 1201.151 - Scope and policy
5 C.F.R. § 1201.151 Cited 62 times
Establishing rules for “any case in which an employee or applicant for employment alleges that a personnel action appealable to the Board was based, in whole or in part, on prohibited discrimination”
Section 1614.403 - How to appeal
29 C.F.R. § 1614.403 Cited 34 times
Indicating that failure to file timely appeal requires dismissal by EEOC

[Redacted], Barbara C., 1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.

15 Cited authorities

Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination

Holding in the Title VII context that the plaintiff's prima facie case creates "a legally mandatory, rebuttable presumption" that shifts the burden of proof to the employer, and "if the employer is silent in the face of the presumption, the court must enter judgment for the plaintiff"

Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination

Holding that a district court was "entitled to consider the racial mix of the work force when trying to make the determination as to motivation" in the employment discrimination context

Holding that "speculat[ion] as to the employer's state of mind" is not sufficient to defeat summary judgment

Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions

Explaining the notice requirements for partial dismissal of claims in an EEO complaint

Recognizing that once a formal appeal or complaint is filed in either forum, it "shall be considered an election to proceed in that forum"

Compelling final decision “within 60 days of the end of the 30-day period for the complainant to request a hearing . . . where the complainant has not requested [one]”

Describing inquisitorial nature of investigation process

Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"

Establishing rules for “any case in which an employee or applicant for employment alleges that a personnel action appealable to the Board was based, in whole or in part, on prohibited discrimination”

Indicating that failure to file timely appeal requires dismissal by EEOC