EEOC Appeal 2020000159

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Tess W.,1
Complainant,
v.
Louis DeJoy,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 2020000159
Hearing No. 430-2018-00013X
Agency No. 1K-291-0028-17
DECISION
Complainant 	appeals 	to 	the 	Equal 	Employment 	Opportunity 	Commission 	(EEOC 	or
Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403, from the Agency’s August 15, 2019 final order
concerning her complaint alleging 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. and the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. For
the 	following 	reasons, 	the 	Commission 	AFFIRMS 	the 	Agency’s 	final 	order 	finding 	no
discrimination.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant was employed by the Agency as
a Laborer Custodial, PS-04, at the Pleasantburg Post Office in Greenville, South Carolina.
On April 26, 2017, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging discriminatory harassment by
the Agency on the bases of race (Caucasian), sex (female), age (over 40), and in reprisal for prior
EEO activity when:
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.

2020000159	2
1. 	On August 23, 2016, she was required to dust carrier cases;
2. 	On September 12, 2016, and date(s) to be provided, she was required to sign a custodian
sign-up sheet indicating the time she arrived, and duties completed;
3. 	On September 29, 2016, her manager contacted the Main Post Office looking for her;
4. 	On October 17, 2016, she was informed that she needed a doctor’s note at the
Pleasantburg Post Office;
5. 	On November 2, 2016, December 2, 2016, December 29, 2016, January 18, 2017,
February 1, 2017, and date(s) to be provided she has been spoken to in a loud, harassing,
and/or demeaning manner;
6. 	On December 5, 2016, she was informed that if she continued to use the wrong colored
mop heads she would be disciplined;
7. 	On December 7, 2016, and December 20, 2016, she was assigned duties that she believes
exceed her work restrictions; and
8. 	On July 19, 2016, November 2, 2016, December 29, 2016, January 11, 2017, January 18,
2017, February 1, 2017, February 16, 2017, and date(s) to be provided, she has been
observed, micro managed, questioned while working, at lunch, and/or break.2
After its investigation into the complaint, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the
report of investigation and notice of right to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ). 	Complainant requested a hearing. 	The Agency submitted a motion for a decision
without a hearing. The AJ subsequently issued a decision by summary judgment in favor of the
Agency.
The Agency issued its final order adopting the AJ’s finding that Complainant failed to prove
discrimination as alleged. The instant appeal followed.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
The Commission’s regulations allow an AJ to grant summary judgment when he or she finds that
there is no genuine issue of material fact. 	29 C.F.R. § 1614.109(g). 	An issue of fact is
“genuine” if the evidence is such that a reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non-
moving party. 	Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp.,
846 F.2D 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988).
2 The Agency dismissed Complainant’s claim concerning her OWCP (the Office of Workers’
Compensation 	Programs) 	issue 	for 	failure 	to 	state 	a 	claim, 	pursuant 	to 	29 	C.F.R.
§ 1614.107(a)(1). 	Since Complainant failed to raise this dismissal during the hearing or on
appeal, we will consider this dismissed claim as abandoned.

2020000159	3
A fact is “material” if it has the potential to affect the outcome of the case. 	In rendering this
appellate decision, we must scrutinize the AJ’s legal and factual conclusions, and the Agency’s
final order adopting them, de novo. 	See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a)(stating that a “decision on an
appeal from an Agency’s final action shall be based on a de novo review…”); see also Equal
Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO-MD-110), at
Chap. 9, § VI.B. 	(as 	revised, August 5, 2015)(providing that an administrative judge’s
determination to issue a decision without a hearing, and the decision itself, will both be reviewed
de novo).
In order to successfully oppose a decision by summary judgment, a complainant must identify,
with specificity, facts in dispute either within the record or by producing further supporting
evidence and must further establish that such facts are material under applicable law. 	Such a
dispute would indicate that a hearing is necessary to produce evidence to support a finding that
the agency was motivated by discriminatory animus. Here, however, Complainant has failed to
establish such a dispute. Even construing any inferences raised by the undisputed facts in favor
of Complainant, a reasonable fact-finder could not find in Complainant’s favor.
Upon careful review of the AJ’s decision and the evidence of record, as well as the parties’
arguments on appeal, we conclude that the AJ correctly determined that the preponderance of the
evidence did not establish that Complainant was discriminated against by the Agency as alleged.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order adopting the AJ’s decision.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0617)
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. A party
shall have twenty (20) 	calendar days of 	receipt of 	another 	party’s timely request 	for
reconsideration in 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). 	All requests and arguments must be submitted to the
Director, 	Office 	of 	Federal 	Operations, 	Equal 	Employment 	Opportunity 	Commission.

2020000159	4
Complainant’s request may be submitted via regular mail to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC
20013, or by certified mail to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. 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 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. The
agency’s request must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal
(FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). 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 (S0610)
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 (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:
______________________________ 	Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
September 23, 2020
Date