DECISION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Appellant, Lawrence C. Hatcher, (“appellant”) appeals only from that portion of the Hearing Officer’s decision dismissing his claim that he was transferred in reprisal for filing complaints of discrimination, in violation of section 207(a) of the Congressional Accountability Act (the “CAA”), 2 U.S.C. § 1317(a); he has not appealed from that portion of the Hearing Officer’s decision finding that he had not been sexually harassed. For the reasons set forth below, the Board affirms the Hearing Officer’s decision.

I.

As found by the Hearing Officer, appellant is a computer specialist currently assigned to the Office of the Director of Engineering, Air Conditioning Engineering Division in the Office of the Architect of the Capitol (“AOC”). See Decision at 2 (Finding of Fact No. 1). He has been employed by the AOC since November of 1989 in a series of long-term temporary positions, beginning as a computer operator, grade 5, in the Computer Operations Branch of Information Resources Management (“IRM”) in the AOC. See id. at 2-3 (Findings of Fact Nos. 2, 3); see also Complainant’s Exhibit Nos. 6, 8.

In November of 1990, appellant started working as a computer programmer in the Applications Branch of IRM in a small office under the direct supervision of the Chief of the Applications Branch, Betty Ann Rouse. See Decision at 2-3 (Findings of Fact Nos. 2, 3). Although appellant received two grade promotions and two in-grade step increases while under Mrs. Rouse’s supervision, rising from grade 5 to grade 9 step 3, see id. (Finding of Fact No. 4), appellant’s job performance came under criticism, see id. (Finding of Fact No. 5). For example, in 1994, he was required to make certain improvements in order to receive an in-grade promotion 2 and in 1995 he was placed on a formal “Performance Improvement Plan.” Id.; see also Tr. at 531-32; Complainant’s Exhibit No. 1.

Learn more and continue to read by downloading the following document(s).