Skip to Main Content. Please Contact Us if there is anything we can do to improve the Accessibility of this site.
  • Search:

Right menu

Left menu


Home / Complaints / Final Orders / Final Orders 2014 / FCHR Order No. 14-025

FCHR Order No. 14-025

Date of Release: 07/30/2014

STATE OF FLORIDA

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS

MICHAEL REED

EEOC Case No. 510201203694

Petitioner

FCHR Case No.

2012-02377

v.

DOAH Case No.

13-0026

AT&T MOBILITY, LLC

FCHR Order No. 14-025

Respondent

 

FINAL ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR

RELIEF FROM AN UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE

Preliminary Matters

Petitioner Michael Reed filed a complaint of discrimination pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, Sections 760.01 - 760.11, Florida Statutes (2011), alleging that Respondent AT&T Mobility, LLC, committed an unlawful employment practice on the basis of Petitioner’s age (DOB: 1-7-52) by failing to hire Petitioner for a customer service representative position for which he had applied.

The allegations set forth in the complaint were investigated, and, on December 5, 2012, the Executive Director issued a determination finding that there was no reasonable cause to believe that an unlawful employment practice had occurred.

Petitioner filed a Petition for Relief from an Unlawful Employment Practice, and the case was transmitted to the Division of Administrative Hearings for the conduct of a formal proceeding.

An evidentiary hearing was held in Daytona Beach, Florida, on September 10, 2013, before Administrative Law Judge Lawrence P. Stevenson.

Judge Stevenson issued a Recommended Order of dismissal, dated May 15, 2014.

The Commission panel designated below considered the record of this matter and determined the action to be taken on the Recommended Order.

Findings of Fact

We find the Administrative Law Judge’s findings of fact to be supported by competent substantial evidence.

We adopt the Administrative Law Judge’s findings of fact.

FCHR Order No. 14-025

Page 2

Conclusions of Law

We find the Administrative Law Judge’s application of the law to the facts to result in a correct disposition of the matter.

We adopt the Administrative Law Judge’s conclusions of law.

Exceptions

Petitioner filed exceptions to the Administrative Law Judge’s Recommended Order, in a document entitled “Exception to ALJ Ruling,” received by the Division of Administrative Hearings on June 2, 2014. The record of the Division of Administrative Hearings also contains a letter from the office of Petitioner’s attorney outlining difficulties in attempting to file the exceptions document on May 30, 2014, the day exceptions were due filed in this case.

We note that the exceptions document was filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings, and not the Commission, and there is no indication on the document that it was provided to Respondent as is required by Fla. Admin. Code R. 28-106.104(4) and Fla. Admin. Code R. 28-106.110. In addition, there is no indication that the Division of Administrative Hearings published the document to Respondent by a notice of ex parte communication.

The Commission published the document to the Respondent through the issuance of a notice of ex parte communication, mailed to the parties on June 6, 2014.

Respondent filed a response to Petitioner’s exceptions document entitled, “Respondent AT&T Mobility’s Response to Petitioner’s Exception to ALJ Ruling,” received by the Commission on or about June 13, 2014.

The exceptions document essentially takes issue with the Administrative Law Judge’s failure to decide the case as a “disparate impact” case.

We note that the initial complaint filed in the case contains no allegations that Respondent discriminated against Petitioner on a “disparate impact” theory. In addition, the record contains no expert statistical evidence to support a theory of “disparate impact” discrimination.

Petitioner’s exceptions are rejected.

Dismissal

This Order disposes of all motions pending before the Commission.

The Petition for Relief and Complaint of Discrimination are DISMISSED with prejudice.

The parties have the right to seek judicial review of this Order. The Commission and the appropriate District Court of Appeal must receive notice of appeal within 30 days of the date this Order is filed with the Clerk of the Commission. Explanation of the right

FCHR Order No. 14-025

Page 3

to appeal is found in Section 120.68, Florida Statutes, and in the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.110.

DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of July , 2014.

FOR THE FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS:

Commissioner Gilbert M. Singer, Panel Chairperson;

Commissioner Onelia Fajardo-Garcia; and

Commissioner Tony Jenkins

Filed this 30th day of July , 2014,

in Tallahassee, Florida.

____________/s/________________

Violet Crawford, Clerk

Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, FL 32301

(850) 488-7082

Copies furnished to:

Michael Reed

c/o David W. Glasser, Esq.

Law Office of David W. Glasser

116 Orange Avenue

Daytona Beach, FL 32114

AT&T Mobility, LLC

c/o Leticia D. Alfonso, Esq.

AT&T Legal Department

675 West Peachtree Street

Atlanta, GA 30308

Lawrence P. Stevenson, Administrative Law Judge, DOAH

James Mallue, Legal Advisor for Commission Panel

FCHR Order No. 14-025

Page 4

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed to the above listed addressees this 30th day of July , 2014.

By: ___________/s/______________

Clerk of the Commission

Florida Commission on Human Relations