05980681
10-01-1998
Barbara Janak, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Barbara Janak v. United States Postal Service
05980681
October 1, 1998
Barbara Janak, )
Appellant, )
) Request Nos. 05980681,
) 05980682, 05980774
v. ) Appeal Nos. 01974102
) 01974086, 01972549
) Agency Nos. 4G-700-0009-97,
William J. Henderson, ) 0096-97, 1243-96
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
__________________________________)
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
On April 13, 1998 and May 12, 1998, Barbara Janak (appellant)
initiated requests to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC) to reconsider the decisions in Janak v. USPS, EEOC Appeal
Nos. 01974102 and 01974086 (December 18, 1997), and Appeal No. 01972549
(April 3, 1998).<1> EEOC Regulations provide that the Commissioners
may, in their discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision.
29 C.F.R. �1614.407(a). The party requesting reconsideration must submit
written argument or evidence which tends to establish one or more of
the following three criteria: new and material evidence is available
that was not readily available when the previous decision was issued,
29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c)(1); the previous decision involved an erroneous
interpretation of law, regulation or material fact, or misapplication of
established policy, 29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c)(2); and the previous decision
is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial precedential
implications, 29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c)(3). Appellant's requests are denied.
In the instant complaint, the agency dismissed the complaints for
failure to timely file a formal complaint, and the previous decisions
affirmed. In her requests for reconsideration appellant asserts that she
was not given adequate time to handle all of her complaints and that she
thought she was given an extension of time. An examination of the requests
for official time submitted with the requests indicate that they cover
numerous complaints not at issue here. Nowhere do they indicate appellant
was given additional time to file a formal complaint, and the requests
for extensions do not indicate that they extend such. For example,
one document which supposedly grants an extension until January 1997,
includes among the numerous complaints the one dealt with in 01972549. The
record indicates that with respect to that complaint (4-G-700-1243-96),
appellant received her final interview on April 23, 1996 and did not
file her formal complaint until Friday, May 10, 1996. Similarly another
extension is dated in March 1997, while the other two complaints at issue
in 01974102 and 01974086 should have been formally filed in November
and December 1996. In addition, the Commission notes that appellant is
well versed in filing EEO complaints, and hence should have been aware
of the need to follow regulatory time frames. As such the Commission
finds that appellant has failed to submit justification for extending
the time limits.
After a review of appellant's requests for reconsideration, the previous
decisions, and the entire records, the Commission finds appellant's
requests do not meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c), and
it is the decision of the Commission to deny appellant's requests.
The decisions of the Commission in Appeal Nos. 01974102, 01974086, and
01972549 remain the Commission's final decisions. There is no further
right of administrative appeal from the decisions of the Commission on
these requests for reconsideration.
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0993)
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.
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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 that the Court appoint
an attorney to represent you and that the Court 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 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:
Oct. 1, 1998
____________ ___________________________
Date Frances M. Hart
Executive Officer
1The Commission notes that as with other of appellant's appeals that
were decided in December 1997, no green card receipt was returned for
01974102. See Janak v. USPS, Request No. 05980661 et al., being issued
contemporaneously. Appeal No. 01974086 was mailed a second time, and
the green card, which carries the notation "resent", indicates appellant
received it on March 17, 1998. As to Appeal No. 01972549, a green card
receipt was returned to the Commission with a date of April 13, 1998.