Evaughan Lane,
Petitioner,

v. 

John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.

Petition No. 03200601211

MSPB No. AT0752060026I1

DECISION

On August 7, 2006, petitioner filed a timely petition with the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission asking for review of a Final Order
issued by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) concerning her claim
of discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.

Petitioner alleged that she was discriminated against on the basis
of race (African-American) when she was removed from the agency,
effective September 22, 2005.  The agency's removal decision indicates
petitioner was charged with:  (1) fraudulently report inflated amounts
of retail stock present during several retail floor stock counts and
/or fraudulently created documents;  (2) purposely failing to comply
with retail floor stock and unit reserve count procedures;  (3) failing
to limit retail floor stock to a two-week level;  (4) failing to comply
with retained credit card procedures;  and (5) fraudulently documenting
cash retained credit counts of employees who were not present on the
dates she allegedly performed the counts.  

A hearing was held and thereafter an MSPB Administrative Judge (AJ) issued
an initial decision finding no discrimination. Complainant admitted that
she engaged in the conduct set forth in charges (3) and (4), and the MSPB
AJ found that the evidence supported the agency's allegations in charges
(1), (2) and (5).   Petitioner did not seek review by the full Board,
but instead filed the instant petition.  Petitioner argues that other,
similarly situated employees outside of her protected basis were not
treated as harshly.  However, the MSPB AJ found that beyond her bare
assertion of disparate treatment, complainant did not produce evidence
to support this assertion.

EEOC regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction over
mixed case appeals on which the MSPB has issued a decision that makes
determinations on allegations of discrimination.  29 C.F.R. § 1614.303
et seq.  The Commission must determine whether the decision of the
MSPB with respect to the allegation of discrimination constitutes a
correct interpretation of any applicable law, rule, regulation or policy
directive, and is supported by the evidence in the record as a whole.
29 C.F.R. § 1614.305(c).

Based upon a thorough review of the record, it is the decision of
the Commission to concur with the final decision of the MSPB finding
no discrimination.  The Commission finds that the MSPB's decision
constitutes a correct interpretation of the laws, rules, regulations,
and policies governing this matter and is supported by the evidence in
the record as a whole.



PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (W0900)

This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right of
administrative appeal from the Commission's decision.  You have the right
to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court,
based on the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, within
thirty (30) calendar days of 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.


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:


______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

November 7, 2006

__________________
Date


1 Due to a new Commission data system, this case has been redesignated
with the above-referenced petition number.
??

??

??

??

2
0320060121



U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C.  20036


3
0320060121