01a00420
02-10-2000
Dennis D. Petrack, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Dennis D. Petrack, )
Complainant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01A00420
) Agency No. 4-C-442-0125-98
William J. Henderson, ) Hearing No. 220-99-5150X
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
________________________________)
DECISION
The Commission finds that the agency's September 20, 1999 decision
finding that the agency did not discriminate against complainant based on
complainant's sex (male), disability (back injury and depression), and
retaliation for prior protected activity, was proper.<1> Complainant
alleged in his complaint that he was discriminated against when on
February 10, 1998, he was denied reimbursement for travel expenses
associated with an EEO hearing.
Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge.
An administrative judge issued a decision dated September 14, 1999 without
holding a hearing. The administrative judge found, and the Commission
agrees, that the material facts were not in dispute. The administrative
judge found that: (1) complainant was claiming mileage in the amount
of $24.80; (2) the agency argued that complainant was not due travel
reimbursement because he had not worked at the agency for more than
four years; (3) the agency issued a check dated September 14, 1998 to
complainant in the amount of $24.80; and (4) complainant endorsed the
check with words stating that the $24.80 was void and was not acceptable
until a hearing was held on the complaint.
The administrative judge stated that complainant is still contending
that his reimbursement was initially denied due to discrimination.
The administrative judge concluded that complainant's rejection of the
agency's payment for the travel expenses was equivalent to a failure to
accept an offer of full relief. The administrative judge found that
the relief offered was full relief and that the complaint was moot.
The administrative judge concluded that there was no reasonable cause to
believe that complainant was denied travel expenses because of his sex,
disability, or in retaliation for his prior protected activity.
In the agency's September 20, 1999 decision the agency concurred with
the decision of the administrative judge. After reviewing complainant's
arguments on appeal and the complete record, the Commission finds that
the administrative judge correctly determined that complainant failed
to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the decision to deny
complainant travel reimbursement was motivated in any way by prohibited
discriminatory animus.
Because of our disposition we do not address the administrative judge's
finding that the matter is moot. Furthermore, we note that our review
of the record shows that complainant is attempting to pursue the matter
solely as a claim of discrimination. Complainant is not asserting that
the agency is in violation of EEOC regulations or policies regarding
reimbursement for travel expenses. To the extent that complainant
intended to make such a claim, we find that the agency's issuance of a
check to complainant for the travel expenses resolved such a claim.
The agency's decision finding no discrimination is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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). 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).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S1199)
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:
February 10, 2000
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 complainant, complainant'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.