0520120402
09-19-2012
Aaliyah Zakat, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Eastern Area), Agency.
Aaliyah Zakat,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Eastern Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120402
Appeal No. 0120120275
Agency No. 4C190008811
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Aaliyah Zakat v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120275 (March 19, 2012). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision where the requesting party demonstrates that: (1) the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
The facts and procedural background are set forth in the previous decision and are incorporated herein by reference. We note the following salient facts: Complainant was terminated from her position on February 27, 2008. According to the previous decision, she did not contact an EEO Counselor until August 8, 2011. The Agency dismissed her formal complaint on the grounds of untimely counselor contact. The previous decision noted Complainant's statement in the record that the day after she was terminated she initiated an EEO complaint in the local EEO office "but EEO never followed through with her complaint." Noting that Complainant provided no proof to support her assertion, the previous decision, finding that she did not act diligently in pursuit of her claim, affirmed the Agency's dismissal. In her reconsideration request, Complainant maintained that she was never provided any documentation from the EEO office after she was told to "fill out a formal complaint." Likewise, she argued that the EEO office never contacted her after promising to do so. She also maintained that she wrote the Philadelphia Postmaster shortly after her removal, but never received a response.
We remind Complainant that a "request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission." Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17. A reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Here, we find no evidence that Complainant has met the criteria for reconsideration. As noted by the previous decision, Complainant waited well over three (3) years before she followed up on this matter. We find nothing in her request that indicates that the previous decision clearly erred when it found that she did not diligently pursue her claim.1
After reviewing the previous decision and the entire record, the Commission finds that the request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120120275 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0610)
This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official Agency head or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you work.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney
with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File a Civil Action").
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
____9/19/12______________
Date
1 A review of two letters that Complainant sent to the Postmaster, in March and April 2008, indicate that she was concerned, in part, with the fact that she had not received her last paycheck. Although she certainly indicated in both letters that she felt her termination was wrong, in neither letter did she indicate that she had contacted the EEO office or that she believed she had been discriminated against based on her sex or religion.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0520120402
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120402