01972318
03-19-1999
Edward J. Reynolds, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (S.E./S.W. Areas) Agency.
Edward J. Reynolds v. United States Postal Service
01972318
March 19, 1999
Edward J. Reynolds, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01972318
) Agency No. 1-H-331-1146-94
William J. Henderson, ) Hearing No. 150-95-8535X
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
(S.E./S.W. Areas) )
Agency. )
)
DECISION
Appellant timely appealed the agency's final decision that it had not
discriminated against him in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et. seq. In his complaint,
appellant alleged that the agency discriminated against him on the basis
of reprisal (prior EEO activity), when appellant became aware that the
agency issued adjustment forms to change his pay for Pay Periods 24,
and 25, 1993, which caused appellant to receive two letters of postal
indebtedness. The Commission accepts this appeal in accordance with
EEOC Order No. 960.001.
Following an investigation of this complaint, appellant requested
a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
administrative judge (AJ). A hearing was conducted on October 24, 1996.
On November 22, 1996, the AJ issued a Recommended Decision (RD) finding
no discrimination.
The AJ found that appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of
discrimination based on reprisal. The record revealed that the agency
terminated appellant effective November 29, 1993. Appellant alleged that
because the agency paid him until December 10, 1993, the agency should
not have issued letters of postal indebtedness, requesting the money it
had paid. However, the AJ found that appellant failed to prove that he
suffered from an adverse action. The AJ found that appellant received
an advantage, instead of an adverse action, since the agency paid him
for several days after his date of termination.
Assuming that appellant had established a prima facie case of reprisal,
the AJ found that appellant failed to establish that the agency's
legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its actions were pretextual.
The AJ found that the agency did not intentionally discriminate against
appellant because its overpayment to appellant was an administrative
mistake, which the agency later corrected. The AJ determined that
appellant failed to show that he was entitled to this overpayment after
his date of termination. Furthermore, the AJ found that appellant's
argument that his supervisor retaliated against him by issuing adjustment
forms for the overpayment defied logic. Appellant's supervisor
permitted the overpayment to appellant in the first place, from which
appellant received a benefit, until the agency recognized its mistake.
Additionally, the AJ found that appellant's supervisor did not pursue the
overpayment adjustment actions until another agency official informed
the supervisor of the overpayment to appellant. On January 3, 1997,
the agency issued a final decision, adopting the AJ's finding of no
discrimination. It is from this decision that appellant now appeals.
After a careful review of the entire record, including arguments and
evidence not specifically addressed in this decision, the Commission
finds that the AJ's recommended decision sets forth the relevant facts,
and properly analyzes the appropriate regulations, policies, and laws
applicable to appellant's complaint as a disparate treatment claim.
Therefore, the Commission discerns no basis in which to disturb the AJ's
finding of no discrimination. Accordingly, it is the decision of the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to AFFIRM the agency's final
decision finding no discrimination.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0795)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this
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 this
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. �l6l4.604(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 this 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 this 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 this 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:
March 19, 1999
DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director
Office of Federal Operations