[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18396-18397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8896]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of arbitration panel decision under the Randolph-
Sheppard Act.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that on November 13, 1992, an
arbitration panel [[Page 18397]] rendered a decision in the matter of
Jimmy Little v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, Division for the
Blind (Docket No. R-S/92-1). This panel was convened by the Secretary
of the Department of Education pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 107d-2, upon
receipt of a complaint filed by petitioner Jimmy Little.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A copy of the full text of the
arbitration panel decision may be obtained from George F. Arsnow, U.S.
Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 3230,
Switzer Building, Washington, DC. 20202-2738. Telephone: (202) 205-
9317. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the TDD number at (202) 205-8298.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Randolph-Sheppard Act (20
U.S.C. 107d-2(c)), the Secretary publishes a synopsis of arbitration
panel decisions affecting the administration of vending facilities on
Federal property.
Background
Jimmy Little, complainant, is a blind vendor licensed by the
Department of Human Services, Division of Services for the Blind, State
of Arkansas. Mr. Little operated the vending facility at Newport Vo-
Tech in Arkansas.
The Arkansas State licensing agency expressed concern and had
evidence that Mr. Little was not following established Vending Facility
Program (VFP) procedures for notifying program officials regarding his
opening and closing hours during the summer.
In a telephone conversation on August 6, 1990, Mr. Little and the
Administrator for the VFP discussed his procedural failures, and it was
indicated then that the agency might revoke his vendor's license. On
August 7, 1990, the Administrator and a specialist in the VFP visited
Mr. Little's facility with questions concerning his summer opening and
closing schedule. The VFP representatives reviewed Mr. Little's
business records and counted his inventory. Complainant felt that the
Administrator's conduct was inappropriate and cast doubts on his
honesty and integrity. As the lunch hour approached, business increased
and the two VFP officials waited outside before continuing their
discussion with Mr. Little.
Mr. Little believed that the Administrator made him look like a
thief in front of his customers, and, upon the officials' return to the
facility, complainant informed them he would no longer manage the
facility and turned in his keys. Subsequently, Mr. Little's license to
operate the vending facility at Newport Vo-Tech was revoked for
abandonment of his facility.
Mr. Little's position is that his abandonment was not by choice but
that he was forced to leave by the behavior of the VFP officials. Mr.
Little has sought the return of his license to operate the facility at
Newport Vo-Tech as well as monetary damages for lost earnings. Mr.
Little requested and was granted a State fair hearing on the matter on
March 1, 1991. The hearing officer ruled that there was not sufficient
evidence presented at the State fair hearing to warrant a finding that
the actions of the VFP personnel were responsible for the complainant's
abandonment of the Newport Vo-Tech facility.
Arbitration Panel Decision
The panel stated that there are sound business reasons to visit a
vendor at his facility, especially if there are questions about his
records, inventory, and hours of business during the summer. Based on
both men's testimony at the hearing, the panel found there was no
evidence that the Administrator ever called Mr. Little a thief and by
Mr. Little's own admission he did not believe any of his patrons
overheard any of the Administrator's inquiry. The complainant believed
that his integrity was questioned because of the Administrator's
request to count his inventory and examine his receipts, but the panel
found that this was part of the Administrator's job. It also found Mr.
Little had not been harassed and was not justified in abandoning his
facility.
On November 13, 1992, the arbitration panel issued its opinion. The
panel found that Mr. Little voluntarily abandoned the facility at
Newport Vo-Tech, and the panel upheld the revocation of complainant's
vending facility license by the Arkansas Department of Human Services,
Division for the Blind.
Dated: April 5, 1995.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 95-8896 Filed 4-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
