01972923
03-01-1999
Yava Harris-Thompson, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (S.E./S.W. Areas) Agency.
Yava Harris-Thompson v. United States Postal Service
01972923
March 1, 1999
Yava Harris-Thompson, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. #01972923
) Agency No. 4-G-770-1154-96
William J. Henderson, ) Hearing No. 330-96-8191X
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
(S.E./S.W. Areas) )
Agency. )
________________________________)
DECISION
On February 20, 1997, Yava Thompson (hereinafter referred to as the
appellant), filed a timely appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (Commission) from the final decision of the United States
Postal Service, (hereinafter referred to as the agency) concerning her
allegation that the agency violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. In her complaint, appellant
alleged that the agency discriminated against her on the basis of sex
(female) when: (1) December 8, 1995, her supervisor telephoned her at
home and spoke in an unprofessional manner, and (2) January 17, 1996,
she was issued a notice of termination. This appeal is accepted by the
Commission in accordance with EEOC Order No. 960.001.
Following an investigation of this complaint, appellant requested
an administrative hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) administrative judge (AJ). On December 18, 1996,
following a hearing, the AJ issued a Recommended Decision (RD) finding
no discrimination.
The AJ found that appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of
sex discrimination. Assuming that appellant had established a prima
facie case of sex discrimination, the AJ found that appellant failed to
establish that the agency's legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for
its actions were pretextual.
During the period in question, appellant was a rural route carrier
(route carrier). The AJ found that appellant offered no evidence that
male route carriers under similar circumstances were treated differently.
The AJ found that the agency's purpose of telephoning appellant at home
was to notify her that she was needed to carry a route. The agency
utilized this procedure to notify route carriers that they were needed
to carry a route which had become vacant.
The AJ found that the agency issued appellant a notice of termination
as a result of her job performance. Appellant's supervisor testified
that the notice was primarily issued because of appellant's attitude.
However, appellant also had problems listening and following instructions.
Appellant even testified that she had an "up-front" personality", and
spoke her mind to everyone.
On February 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 RD 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 to disturb the agency's finding of no discrimination.
Accordingly, it is the decision of the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission to AFFIRM the agency's final decision.
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. � 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 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 1, 1999
DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director
Office of Federal Operations