Beverly T. Rutt-Hahn - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
                         (d) Plaintiff was unfavorably evaluated by                   
               her supervisors and unfavorable evaluations were                       
               maintained in her personnel files.                                     
                         (e) Plaintiff was issued discriminatory                      
               directives by her supervisors including letters of                     
               deficiency, warning, instruction and concern.                          
                    3.8 Plaintiff was coerced into withdrawing a                      
               complaint of sex discrimination filed in 1979 by                       
               statements from the Director of Employee and Labor                     
               Relations that her complaint would harm her career                     
               opportunities.                                                         
                              *   *   *   *   *   *   *                               
                    3.11  Defendants' discriminating letters and                      
               evaluations in 1981 created a chilling effect of such                  
               proportion that it was fruitless to apply for                          
               promotions for which she was qualified.                                
                    3.12  Defendants treated plaintiff differently                    
               from similarly situated employees by failing to                        
               accommodate plaintiff's handicapping conditions of                     
               heart disease and stress induced illness from November                 
               1983 to the present * * *.                                             
                    3.13  As a result of filing complaints of                         
               violations of her equal employment opportunity,                        
               plaintiff was denied training details and assignments,                 
               denied promotions, given unfavorable evaluations,                      
               discouraged from applying for promotions and coerced                   
               into withdrawing a complaint alleging sex                              
               discrimination.                                                        
          Petitioner based her discrimination allegations on the following:           
                    1.1 [Title VII of] The Civil Rights Act of 1964                   
               as amended, 42 USC Sec. 2000 e-16(c);                                  
                         The Age Discrimination in Employment Act, as                 
               amended, 29 USC Sec. 621, et seq.;                                     
                         The Civil Rights Attorneys Fee Act of 1976,                  
               as amended, 42 USC Sec. 1988;                                          
                         39 USC Sec. 409, and application thereof by                  
               the courts, permitting judicial review of final                        
               decisions of the U.S. Postal Service;                                  




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011