Alfred S.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Oct 2, 2019

2019003516 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 2, 2019)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Alfred S.,1
Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.

Request No. 2019003516

Appeal No. 0120180271

Hearing No. 410-2014-00261X

Agency No. 4K-300-0072-14

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120180271 (March 26, 2019).
EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to
reconsider any previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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(c).

On April 5, 2014, Complainant filed his complaint alleging discrimination based on race
(Caucasian), sex (male), and age (50) when:

1. Approximately October 23, 2013, management paid Complainant incorrectly for
his training hours and a Window Customer Service Supervisor informed him that

1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name
when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website.
2019003516

2
the Agency would give him a paid day off every week until he was fully
compensated and gave him “inconvenience pay;”
2. On November 15, 2013, Complainant’s Immediate Supervisor talked to
Complainant about “offending one of the Supervisors” and “acting like a know it
all;”
3. On November 19, 2013, a Customer Service Manager told Complainant he looked
like a Ken doll;
4. On November 19, 2013, an Annex Customer Service Supervisor gave
Complainant his 30-day performance evaluation on his 47th day of work; and
5. On January 3, 2014, S4 terminated Complainant’s employment with the Agency.

On September 26, 2017, the Agency issued its final decision dismissing claims 1 – 4 due to
untimely EEO Counselor contact pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2). The Agency also
found no discrimination regarding claim 5 and found no harassment, considering the dismissed
claims. Complainant appealed the Agency’s final decision. The Commission previously
affirmed the Agency’s final decision.

In his request, Complainant reiterates arguments he previously made. The Commission
emphasizes 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), at 9-
18 (Aug. 5, 2015); see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20,
2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the appellate
decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or will have a
substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not
done so here.

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(c), and it is the decision of the
Commission to deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120180271 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.

2019003516

3
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0815)

If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may
request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or
costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may
request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of
court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The
court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter
the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to
File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

October 2, 2019
Date