Rodolfo E. Segarra, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionOct 5, 1999
01974161 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 5, 1999)

01974161

10-05-1999

Rodolfo E. Segarra, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Rodolfo E. Segarra v. United States Postal Service

01974161

October 5, 1999

Rodolfo E. Segarra, )

Appellant, )

) Appeal No. 01974161

v. ) Agency No. 4-E-870-1148-95

)

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 his complaint of unlawful employment

discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

42 U.S.C. � 2000e 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 he alleged that the agency retaliated

against him for previous EEO activity by changing his route between June

27 and July 3, 1995. The agency investigated the complaint and issued

a final decision finding no retaliation, from which appellant appealed.

To prevail in his reprisal claim, appellant must first establish a prima

facie case, by showing that he engaged in protected activity, that the

official named in his complaint knew of that activity, and that he was

subjected to an adverse action in such a time or in such a manner as to

support an inference of retaliatory motivation. Hochstadt v. Worcester

Foundation for Experimental Biology, 425 F. Supp. 318 (D. Mass),

aff'd, 545 F.2d 222 (1st Cir. 1976); Frye v. Department of Labor,

EEOC Request No. 05940764 (December 15, 1994). In this case, we find

that appellant satisfied all three elements of the prima facie case,

in that the supervisor's decision to "bump" him from his desired route

occurred close enough in time to his previous EEO activity that it raises

suspicion of reprisal.

The supervisor stated that the route to which appellant was moved, "was

an easier route to carry and case." Affidavit B, p. 2. We find this

reason to be legitimate, nondiscriminatory and fully supported by the

record. The agency's internal procedures manual specified that utility

carriers such as appellant would not be moved off their scheduled routes,

unless the regular carrier is called in on an off-day, in which case the

regular carrier would "bump" the utility carrier to one of the other

four routes in an assigned string of routes. Exhibit 3. Apparently,

that is what happened in this case. The supervisor stated that the

regular carrier came in for overtime, and that as a result, he had to

bump appellant from route 801 to route 802. He also stated that, in

the past, appellant had never objected or otherwise refused to carry

another route. Affidavit B. Appellant does not present any evidence,

other than his own statements, which contradicts the testimony offered

by the supervisor, or which undermines the supervisor's credibility as

a witness.

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 unlawful reprisal 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:

Oct. 5, 1999

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations