STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS

JOSE A. RAMIREZ, EEOC Case No.

Petitioner, FCHR Case No.

v. DOAH No. 16-5778

GCA SERVICE GROUP, FCHR Order No. 17-051

Respondent.

/

FINAL ORDER DISMISSING PETITIO N FOR

RELIE F FROM AN UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTIC E

Preliminary Matters

Petitioner Jose A. Ramirez filed a complaint of discrimination pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, Sections 760.01 - Florida Statutes

alleging that Respondent GCA Service Group committed unlawful employment practices on the bases of Petitioner's race (Black), color (Black) and national origin (Cuban) by drastically reducing Petitioner's hours and wages, by denying Petitioner promotion and by Petitioner from employment.

Prior to the issuance of an investigatory detennination by the Commission, 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 fonnal proceeding.

An evidentiary hearing was held in Orlando, Florida, on December 8, before Administrative Law Judge J. Bruce Culpepper.

Judge Culpepper issued a Recommended Order of dismissal, dated April 26,

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

Findings of Fact

We 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.

Filed July 13, 2017 1:24 PM Division of Administrative Hearings

Conclusions of Law

We 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, received by the Division of Administrative Hearings on or about May 4, and forwarded by the Division of Administrative Hearings to the Commission.

There is no indication on the exceptions document that it was provided to Respondent as is required by Fla. Admin. Code and Fla. Admin. Code

However, the Commission published the document to the Respondent, and placed the document in the record of this case through the issuance of a notice of ex parte communication, mailed to the parties on May

Respondent filed a response to Petitioner's exceptions.

With regard to exceptions to Recommended Orders, the Administrative Procedure Act states, "The final order shall include an explicit ruling on each exception, but an agency need not rule on an exception that does not clearly identify the disputed portion of the recommended order by page number or paragraph, that does not identify the legal basis for the exception, or that does not include appropriate and specific citations to the record." Section 120.57(l)(k), Florida Statutes (2016); see, also, Taylor v. Universal Studios, FCHR Order No. 14-007 (March 26, McNeil v. HealthPort Technologies, FCHR Order No. (June 27, 2012) and Bartolone v. Best Western Hotels, FCHR Order No. 07-045 (August 24, 2007).

A review of Petitioner's exceptions document suggests that it does not comply with this statutory provision.

It can be said, generally, that Petitioner excepts to the Administrative Law Judge's finding that no unlawful employment practice occurred in this matter.

The Commission has stated, "It is well settled that it is the Administrative Law Judge's function 'to consider all of the evidence presented and reach ultimate conclusions of fact based on competent substantial evidence by resolving conflicts, judging the credibility of witnesses and drawing permissible inferences therefrom. I f the evidence presented supports two inconsistent findings, it is the Administrative Law Judge's role to decide between them.' Beckton v. Department of Children and Family Services,

F.A.L.R. at (FCHR 1998), citing Maggio v. Martin Marietta Aerospace, 9

F.A.L.R. 2168, 2171 (FCHR 1986)." Barr v. Columbia Regional Medical Center, 22 F.A.L.R. at (FCHR Accord, Bowles v. Jackson County Hospital Corporation, FCHR Order No. 05-135 (December 6, 2005), Eaves v.

Central Florida Portfolio, LLC, FCHR Order No. (March and Taylor, supra.

In addition, it has been stated, "The ultimate question of the existence of discrimination is a question of fact." Florida Department of Community Affairs v.

586 So. 2d at (Fla. DCA Accord, Coley v. Bay County Board of County Commissioners, FCHR Order No. (March Eaves, supra, and Taylor, supra.

Petitioner's exceptions are rejected.

Dismissal

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

DONE AND ORDERED this day of , 2017.

FOR THE FLORIDA COMMISSION ON MAN RELATIONS:

Commissioner Rebecca Steele, Panel Chairperson; Commissioner Donna and

Commissioner Jay Pichard

in Tallahassee, Florida.

Clerk

Commission on Human Relations 4075 Esplanade Way, Room Tallahassee, FL 32399

(850) 488-7082

Copies furnished to:

Jose A. Ramirez

Drive Orlando, FL 32822

GCA Service Group

c/o Grissel T. Seijo, Esq. Littler Mendelson, PC

Wells Fargo Center, Suite 2700 Southeast 2 n d Avenue

Miami, FL

J. Bruce Culpepper, Administrative Law Judge, DOAH James Mailue, Legal Advisor for Commission Panel

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a the foregoing has been mailed to the above

By:

Clerk of the Commission

Florida Commission on Human Relations

Docket for Case No: 16-005778

Orders for Case No: 16-005778