negative performance evaluations and memoranda followed Mrs. Gee in the Division file and were used against her to her detriment.
Management's position that a baccalaureate degree and a degree in Library Science were the qualifying factors for a person to be classified as a professional librarian pursuant to the Classification Manual is belied by the fact that Goetz and Reamy are now classified as GS-11 and GS-12 respectively. Neither possesses a college degree and neither has any more credits toward a college degree than the plaintiff.
When Goetz was first promoted as supervisor of the Searching Unit, his experience was considered as a substitute for a lack of his college degree. Mrs. Gee was denied a like opportunity for her experience to be considered as a substitute.
The Court concludes that it has jurisdiction over this employment discrimination proceeding based on race under the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Mrs. Gee has exhausted her administrative remedies.
Mrs. Gee has presented a prima facie case of discrimination and has demonstrated by a preponderance of evidence that despite her qualifications, she was denied a promotion to the position of Supervisor, Searching Unit, GS-10.
Her denial was based on racially discriminatory practices exercised against her by the Library of Congress.
She was subjected to discrimination and reprisals because of her race and because of her continued and known opposition to unlawful employment practices against blacks as reflected by her activities in the BELC.
She was not selected for the GS-10 supervisory position she sought because of discriminations and reprisals by Library personnel.
The Library of Congress has failed to rebut the evidence presented by the plaintiff and has not demonstrated that her race did not influence the decision denying her the GS-10 position.
The qualifications and requirements for the GS-10 position were not clearly demonstrated to be job-related. In any event, Mrs. Gee by competent testimony was regarded as minimally qualified.
The Library has failed to explain and justify the disparate treatment afforded plaintiff as compared with her two immediate supervisors, Goetz and Reamy, with whom she interacted during the period of her active participation in the BELC.
These findings and conclusions will be transcribed, filed immediately, made a part of this proceeding, and shall constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 52, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The plaintiff has met the criteria for appropriate relief established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S. Ct. 1817, 36 L. Ed. 2d 668 (1973). Mrs. Gee is entitled to and is granted judgment against the Library of Congress.
An order granting the plaintiff appropriate relief will be entered.
Counsel should submit an application, a memorandum in support of a claim for attorneys' fee.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.