[Redacted], Hillary S., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Eastern Area), Agency.Download PDFEqual Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 7, 2022Appeal No. 2021001544 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 7, 2022) Copy Citation U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Hillary S.,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Eastern Area), Agency. Appeal No. 2021001544 Hearing No. 490-2016-00219X Agency No. 1C-371-0082-15 DECISION On November 25, 2020, Complainant filed an appeal, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(a), from the Agency’s October 16, 2020 final order concerning an equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint claiming employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. BACKGROUND During the period at issue, Complainant worked as a General Expeditor, Grade PS-07, at the Agency’s Processing and Distribution Center (PD&C) in Nashville, Tennessee. On December 21, 2015, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her based on race (African American), sex (female), color (Black), disability (knee/ankle), and in reprisal for EEO-protected activity when: 1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website. 2 2021001544 1) From June 26, 2015 thru July 23, 2015, management would not give Complainant Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) forms; 2) On July 18, 2015, Complainant’s days off were changed; 3) On July 23, 2015, Complainant was sent home as no work available; and 4) On multiple dates in 2014 and continuing, the acting supervisor referred to her “limited duty” status and told Complainant she was holding up a position. After its investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing. The AJ held a hearing and subsequently issued a decision in favor of the Agency. The Agency issued its final order adopting the AJ’s conclusion that Complainant failed to prove discrimination as alleged. The instant appeal followed. Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by an AJ will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence is defined as “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” See Univ. Camera Corp. v. Nat’l Labor Rel. Bd., 340 U.S. 474, 477 (1951). A finding regarding whether or not discriminatory intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982). An AJ's conclusions of law are subject to a de novo standard of review, whether or not a hearing was held. An AJ’s credibility determination based on the demeanor of a witness or on the tone of voice of a witness will be accepted unless documents or other objective evidence so contradicts the testimony or the testimony so lacks in credibility that a reasonable fact finder would not credit it. See EEOC Management Directive 110, Chapter 9, at § VI.B. (Aug. 5, 2015). Regarding Claim (1), the AJ determined that managers had a non-discriminatory explanation for their reluctance or delays in providing Complainant OWCP forms in that Complainant had requested the OWCP forms six months after she had sustained her on-the-job injury. Regarding Claim (2), the AJ found that although Complainant’s schedule was changed on July 18, 2015, Complainant never worked the changed schedule because Complainant effectively stopped working after July 19, 2015, and did not return until October 20, 2016. Regarding Claim (3) the AJ held that Agency management testified credibly that Complainant was sent home in late July 2015 for legitimate reasons. Specifically, Complainant had doctor’s orders to use crutches. However, there was no position at the Nashville PD&C where Complainant’s need to use crutches could be accommodated. Furthermore, there were no similarly situated comparators who worked in Complainant’s position under the same supervision who had been permitted to work while on crutches. 3 2021001544 Finally, regarding Claim (4) the AJ decided that Complainant had failed to evidence that supervisors made derogatory comments about her injuries to the extent that such comments were pervasive or abusive. Upon careful review of the AJ’s decision and the evidence of record, as well as the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that substantial evidence of record supports the AJ’s determination that Complainant has not proven discrimination by the Agency as alleged. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order adopting the AJ’s decision. STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0920) The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or evidence that 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 for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. If the party requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for reconsideration. A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). Complainant should submit his or her request for reconsideration, and any statement or brief in support of his or her request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx Alternatively, Complainant can submit his or her request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFO receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). 4 2021001544 Either party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of service on the other party, unless Complainant files his or her request via the EEOC Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required. Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted together with the 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 (S0610) 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 (Z0815) If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits). FOR THE COMMISSION: ______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature Carlton M. Hadden, Director Office of Federal Operations March 7, 2022 Date Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation