EEOC Appeal 2026002853

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Henry S.,1
Complainant,
v.
David Steiner,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Field Areas and Regions),
Agency.
Appeal No. 2026002853
Hearing No. 440-2025-00143X
Agency No. 1F-641-0239-24
DECISION
On June 1, 2026, Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment
Opportunity 	Commission 	(EEOC 	or 	Commission), 	pursuant 	to 	29 	C.F.R.
§1614.403(a), from the Agency’s final order concerning his equal employment
opportunity (EEO) complaint of 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.
For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the Agency’s final order.
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Mail
Handler Equipment Operator, 05M, at the Agency’s Saint Paul MN Processing &
Distribution Center (P&DC) facility in Saint Paul, Minnesota. 	On June 1, 2026,
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.

2026002853	2
Complainant filed a complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against him
on the bases of race (Caucasian), color (white), and in reprisal for prior protected
EEO activity when2:
1. On December 24, 2023, Complainant was walked/escorted out of the
building for going behind a plastic fence.
2. In September 2023, management told Complainant to use a different
restroom than the one he needed to use right away.
3. On July 24, 2024, management screamed Complainant’s name on the
workroom floor and accused him of being away from his assignment,
questioned his whereabouts, and threatened to walk him out of the building
for saying what assignment he picked.
4. On March 2024, management took away Complainant’s license to operate
powered industrial truck (PIT) equipment.
5. On July 22, 2024, management bullied Complainant by sneaking up on
him and changing his job assignment seven times throughout the day when
others were only given one assignment.
6. On July 17, 2024, and on July 24, 2024, and other possible dates,
management harassed and humiliated Complainant by such things as
threatening him with absence without official leave for using the restroom,
accusing him of placing hampers in areas, talking down to him, and telling
him to lower his tone of voice or “I’ll walk you”.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a
copy of the report of investigation and notice of his right to request a hearing before
an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant requested a hearing before an AJ.
The 	Agency 	submitted 	a 	motion 	for 	a 	decision 	without 	a 	hearing, 	which
Complainant opposed. The AJ granted the Agency’s motion and issued a decision
by summary judgment in favor of the Agency, finding no discrimination. The
Agency subsequently issued a final order fully implementing the AJ’s finding that
Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected him to discrimination as
alleged. The instant appeal followed. 	Complainant did not file a brief on appeal.
2 The dates in claims 1, 2, and 3, reflect the dates Complainant provided during the
investigation.

2026002853	3
The AJ found that the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for
its actions. 	Regarding claim 1, the Manager of Distribution Operations (MDO)
stated that he recalled Complainant being walked out for a safety violation at or
around this time, but he did not fully recall the management official who was
responsible or how he was involved.
As to claims 2 and 3, Supervisor of Distribution Operations 1 (SDO1) stated she did
not recall either incident occurring.
Concerning claim 4, a Supervisor Distribution Operations (SDO2) stated that she
was the management official responsible for taking Complainant’s license to operate
powered industrial truck (PIT) equipment. SDO2 explained Complainant was
driving a pallet jack off the clock, and the mail handlers were advised not to drive
PIT when off the clock as it was a danger and possible liability to the Agency if
someone was to become injured. SDO2 stated that Complainant received his license
back about one to two weeks later.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Complainant provided no evidence besides his own
assertions that these incidents took place. Furthermore, there is no evidence showing
that even if these incidents did take place, they were motivated by the alleged bases
of discrimination.
As to the claim of harassment, the AJ found that Complainant had not shown that
the incidents he complained of were sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the
conditions 	of 	Complainant’s 	employment. 	Furthermore, 	the 	AJ 	found 	that
Complainant failed to show that any of the harassing incidents were motivated by
race, color or reprisal. We agree with the AJ’s analysis and findings of no
discrimination.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order implementing the AJ’s decision
finding no discrimination.

2026002853	4
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1125)
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 Sector
(OFS) 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 their request for reconsideration, and any statement or
brief in support of their request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at
https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx. 	Alternatively, Complainant can
submit their request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Sector, 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 OFS 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). Either
party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of
service on the other party, unless Complainant files their request via the EEOC
Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required.

2026002853	5
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(f).
COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0124)
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 their
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:
T. Gimbrere 	Acting Director's signature
T. Gimbrere, Acting Director
Office of Federal Sector
September 16, 2026
Date