- 3 -
Relief", petitioner alleged that the Postal Service, et al.,
discriminated against her from "1976 to the present" based on her
sex, age (then 48), handicap (heart disease; stress-induced
illness), and in retaliation for having filed prior Equal
Employment Opportunity complaints. Petitioner specifically
alleged, among other things, that:
3.2 Defendants pursued a policy and practice of
failing to provide female employees, and older females
particularly, with equal opportunities for "details"
(temporary promotions) and training in the letter
carrier, supervisory and station management workforce
of the U.S. Postal Service.
* * * * * * *
3.6 Defendants' policy and practice of providing
certain employees with "details" (temporary promotions)
to higher EAS levels, which experience defendants then
consider essential or desirable for promotion into
higher level positions has a disparate impact on
females and particularly those aged 40 and older.
3.7 Defendants treated plaintiff differently from
similarly situated male employees and employees under
age 40 in that:
(a) Plaintiff was held at level EAS-15,
where she performed successfully, during all relevant
times herein, but was not selected for promotions into
positions for which she applied at levels EAS-16
through 20 from 1976 through 1984.
(b) Plaintiff was denied higher level
training details, denied equal access to carrier
supervisory assignments and denied officer-in-charge
assignments by defendants' agents.
(c) Plaintiff's lack of higher level
training details, officer-in-charge assignments and/or
lack of experience in carrier supervision were used as
reasons and/or pretexts for denial of promotion.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011