05-001004 Douglas Randall vs. Sacred Heart Health System, Inc. Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, July 11, 2005.

Summary: Petitioner did not allege any violation of Florida Civil Rights Act. Recommended dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DOUGLAS RANDALL, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 05-1004

)

SACRED HEART )

HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A hearing was held pursuant to notice, on May 23, 2005, in

Pensacola, Florida, before the Division of Administrative

Hearings by its designated Administrative Law Judge, Barbara J.

Staros.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Douglas Randall, pro se

3108 North 6th Avenue

Pensacola, Florida 32503

For Respondent: Erick M. Drlicka, Esquire

Stacey N. Penn, Esquire

Emmanuel, Sheppard & Condon

30 South Spring Street

Pensacola, Florida 32502

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether Respondent violated the Florida Civil Rights Act of

1992, as alleged in the Charge of Discrimination filed by

Petitioner on March 10, 2004.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On March 10, 2004, Petitioner, Douglas Randall, filed a

Charge of Discrimination with the Florida Commission on Human

Relations (FCHR), which alleged that Sacred Heart Hospital

violated Section 760.10, Florida Statutes (2004), by

discriminating against him on the basis of race and for

retaliation. The Charge of Discrimination alleged that he was

given a written reprimand which prevented him from transferring

positions, was given an unfair evaluation, and was placed on

probation after complaining about disparate treatment.

The allegations were investigated, and on February 16,

2005, FCHR issued its determination of No Cause and Notice of

Determination: No Cause.

A Petition for Relief was filed by Petitioner on March 16,

2005. In the Petition for Relief, Petitioner stated that he

never complained about race and that race was never an issue but

retaliation was. FCHR transmitted the case to the Division of

Administrative Hearings on or about March 18, 2005. A Notice of

Hearing was issued setting the case for formal hearing on

May 23, 2005.

At hearing, Petitioner testified on his own behalf.

Petitioner offered Exhibits numbered 1 through 4. Exhibits 1

and 4 were admitted into evidence. Exhibits 2 and 3 were

rejected. Respondent did not present any witnesses or offer any

additional exhibits but did cross-examine Petitioner.

A Transcript, consisting of one volume, was filed on

June 6, 2005. Respondent timely filed a Proposed Recommended

Order which has been considered in the preparation of this

Recommended Order. 1/ Petitioner did not file a post-hearing

submission.

All references to Florida Statutes is to 2004 unless

otherwise indicated.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Petitioner is an African-American man who was employed

by Respondent from May 2003, until July 29, 2004.

2. Respondent, Sacred Heart Health Systems, operates a

charitable, not for profit acute care hospital in Pensacola

called Sacred Heart Hospital.

3. While employed at Sacred Heart Hospital, Petitioner was

a call center resource agent. His supervisor was Jane Nix.

4. During cross-examination, Petitioner responded as

follows when asked whether Respondent had discriminated against

him on the basis of race:

Q: And is it fair to say that you truly

believe that Sacred Heart did not

discriminate against you because of your

race at any time during your employment?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: And is it also true that Ms. Nicks [sic]

did not discriminate against you because of

your race at any time during your employment

at Sacred Heart Hospital?

A: No, sir, she did not.

Q: Okay. Your race was never an issue at

any time during your employment at Sacred

Heart Hospital?

A: Not to my knowledge, no sir.

Q: You also never complained of

discrimination based on race at any time

during your employment at Sacred Heart

Hospital; is that correct?

A: This is correct.

Q: And no one at Sacred Heart ever

retaliated against you because of your race?

A: Not because of race, no sir.

Q: And you know this because you would not

allow anybody to discriminate against you

because of your race; is that correct?

A: This is correct.

Q: Or retaliate against you because of your

race?

A: This is correct.

Q: And you do not believe that Sacred Heart

violated the Florida Civil Rights Act; is

that correct?

A: No, sir, I do not.

Q: And you do not believe that Sacred Heart

violated the Florida Civil Rights Act; is

that correct?

A: No, sir, I do not.

Q: And you do not believe that Ms. Nicks

(sic) violated the Florida Civil Rights Act;

is that correct?

A: No sir, I do not.

5. By his own admission, Petitioner does not allege

discrimination or retaliation by Respondent on the basis of

race.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

6 . Section 760.10(1), Florida Statutes, states that it is

an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discharge or

otherwise discriminate against an individual on the basis of

race.

7. Because there are no allegations that Respondent

violated the Florida Civil Rights Act, there has been no unlawful

employment practice committed as contemplated by Section 760.10,

Florida Statutes.

8. Accordingly, the Florida Commission on Human Relations

has no jurisdiction over this matter.

RECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions

of Law set forth herein, it is

RECOMMENDED:

That the Florida Commission on Human Relations enter a

final order dismissing the Petition for Relief for lack of

jurisdiction.

DONE AND ENTERED this 11th day of July, 2005, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

___________________________________

BARBARA J. STAROS

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

[phone] SUNCOM 278-9675

Fax Filing [phone]

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 11th day of July, 2005.

ENDNOTE

1/ Post-hearing submissions were due on June 16, 2005.

Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order was docketed on June 29,

2005. However, counsel for Respondent filed documentation

showing that Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order was

successfully faxed to the Division of Administrative Hearings on

June 9, 2005. The undersigned is satisfied that Respondent's

Proposed Recommended Order was timely filed.

COPIES FURNISHED :

Douglas Randall

3120 North 6th Avenue

Pensacola, Florida 32503

Erick M. Drlicka, Esquire

Emmanual, Sheppard & Condon

30 South Spring Street

Pensacola, Florida 32502

Karen O. Emmanuel, General Counsel

Sacred Heart Hospital

Post Office Box 2700

Pensacola, Florida 32513-2700

Denise Crawford, Agency Clerk

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Cecil Howard, General Counsel

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15

days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to

this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will

issue the final order in this case.