Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01286/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01286-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Henry L. Harris
Plaintiff
Victoria Monroe
Plaintiff
John E. Potter
Defendant

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HENRY L. HARRIS,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

JOHN E. POTTER, U.S.

Postmaster General,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-1286 BZ

FINDINGS OF FACT

By Order dated May 11, 2006, I scheduled an evidentiary

hearing be held in order to clarify whether a) Henry Harris in

2003 experienced an adverse employment action, and b)

defendant had legitimate non-retaliatory reasons for denying

Mr. Harris overtime work in 2003. See Harris v. Potter, 2006

WL 1305222 (N.D. Cal.). Due to the untimely death of Mr.

Harris, the evidentiary hearing did not occur until March 26,

2007. At the hearing, defendant was present and represented

by counsel. Victoria Monroe, having been substituted as

plaintiff as successor in interest to Mr. Harris, was present

and acting pro se.

Having considered all testimony and pertinent evidence

Case 3:05-cv-01286-BZ Document 130 Filed 03/28/07 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

entered into the record, I make the following FINDINGS OF

FACT:

1. In 2003 and 2004, at the time he complained that he

was subject to retaliation, Mr. Harris was employed by

defendant at his Bay Valley District as a Driver Instructor

Examiner (DIE), assigned to the Training and Development Unit

(Training) of the Human Resources Department. One of his

principal duties was to train people who had been hired to

drive postal service vehicles. 

2. In 2003 and 2004, Virginia Glover was the manager of

the Human Resources Department of the Bay Valley District. 

Her department had approximately 65 employees. During this

period, none of the employees in her department received

overtime inasmuch as she believed that, as a support unit,

there was no overtime budget for her department.

3. In 2003 and 2004, Janice Newsome was the manager of

the Training Unit at the Bay Valley District and Mr. Harris

worked in her unit. During that period, she did not approve

any overtime for any employee in her unit because she believed

that there was no budget for overtime. 

4. Although Budget and Finance Department records

indicate that approximately 101 overtime hours were allotted

to the Human Resources Department for fiscal year 2003, and

272 hours for 2004, Ms. Glover was not aware of these

allocations.

5. During 2003 and 2004 no employee in the Training Unit

was paid overtime.

6. Another part of the Bay Valley District is the

Case 3:05-cv-01286-BZ Document 130 Filed 03/28/07 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

Transportation and Networks Division. One of the principal

duties of its employees is to drive the trucks that carry mail

between postal service facilities. Some of these drivers are

called Tractor Trailer Operators (TTOs). Some TTOs, such as

Dennis Ward, have as one of their duties training or retraining other TTOs.

7. Those hired to drive postal service vehicles must

complete a multi-step training program requiring classroom and

hands-on vehicle instruction, and culminating in three days of

“carrier academy.” 

8. The training must be coordinated so that the

prerequisite steps are completed prior to the three day

academy.

9. In 2003 and 2004, when one or more full-time DIE’s

were absent from work, or when additional trainers were needed

to meet the training demands, TTOs were assigned to handle DIE

duties (on an ad hoc basis). 

10. When ad hoc DIE’s were utilized, they were paid

straight time out of the Transportation budget. They were not

paid overtime.

11. When on February 21, 2003, Mr. Ward was utilized as

an ad hoc DIE, he was not paid any overtime. 

12. Use of ad hoc DIE’s was more efficient than assigning

overtime to Mr. Harris. Since Mr. Harris was working a full

day, and since the driver training required two to three hours

per person, he could not train as many people working overtime

as could an ad hoc DIE working a full day. It was also more

economical for defendant since it provided additional trainers

Case 3:05-cv-01286-BZ Document 130 Filed 03/28/07 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

to the Training Unit at no additional cost to defendant, since

the ad hoc DIEs were paid straight time from the

transportation budget and because more employees could be

trained per day.

13. The Training Unit kept no overtime desired list.

14. The Transportation Department kept overtime desired

lists for each of the various craft sections, including TTOs,

by tour or shifts.

15. Historically, employees such as Mr. Harris who worked

as DIE’s in the Training Unit were not allowed to sign onto

the overtime desired lists for the TTO Section.

16. As a DIE, Mr. Harris would have been eligible for 

overtime hours in the various craft Sections only after the

Sections’ overtime desired lists were exhausted and only after

the employees working in other tours within the same Section

declined the assignment.

17. The evidence presented at the hearing was that in

2003 and 2004, the TTO overtime desired list was never

exhausted. No evidence was presented to the contrary. I

therefore find that during 2003 and 2004, Mr. Harris was never

denied an opportunity for overtime work in the Transportation

Department for which he was eligible.

Dated: March 28, 2007

 Bernard Zimmerman

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\HARRIS\FINDINGS.OF.FACT.wpd

Case 3:05-cv-01286-BZ Document 130 Filed 03/28/07 Page 4 of 4