Franklin D. Nicoloudakisv.United States Postal Service 05981139 February 2, 2001 . Franklin D. Nicoloudakis, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 2, 2001
05981139 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 2, 2001)

05981139

02-02-2001

Franklin D. Nicoloudakis v. United States Postal Service 05981139 February 2, 2001 . Franklin D. Nicoloudakis, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Franklin D. Nicoloudakis v. United States Postal Service

05981139

February 2, 2001

.

Franklin D. Nicoloudakis,

Complainant,

v.

William J. Henderson,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Request No. 05981139

Appeal No. 01980048

Agency No. 1-A-086-1029-96

GRANTING OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Franklin

D. Nicoloudakis v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01980048

(July 24, 1998),<1> which affirmed the agency's final decision.

EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion,

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. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b). For the reasons set forth herein,

complainant's request is granted.

Complainant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor with regard to

the three complaints at issue on March 25, 1996, January 3, 1997, and

February 11, 1997. In a formal EEO complaint dated March 13, 1997,

(Agency No. 1A-086-0020-97), complainant claimed that he had been

discriminated against on the bases of his disability (back and foot),

national origin (Greek), and in reprisal for previous EEO activity when

on December 27, 1996, he became aware that during pay period 26/96,

his request for leave without pay (LWOP) in lieu of sick leave was not

honored and instead he was paid for 20 hours of annual leave and 12 hours

of sick leave. In another formal EEO complaint dated March 13, 1997,

(Agency No. 1A-086-0021-97), complainant claimed discrimination on the

same bases as the aforementioned complaint when on February 7, 1997,

he became aware that during pay period 3/97, his request for LWOP in

lieu of sick leave was not honored and instead he was paid for 36 hours

of annual leave and 4 hours of sick leave. In a formal EEO complaint

dated July 27, 1996, (Agency No. 1A-086-1029-96), complainant claimed

discrimination on the aforementioned bases when on March 26, 1996,

management denied his request that all of his PS Forms 3971, Request

for or Notification of Absence, dated after January 1996, be changed to

read �LWOP in Lieu of Sick�. Complainant requested as relief in each

complaint that his annual leave and sick leave be completely restored

without any cost to him. Complainant also requested that an injunction

be issued prohibiting further charges against his leave balance without

his consent, and that disciplinary action be imposed on the General

Supervisor, PSDS Operations.

The agency extended settlement offers to complainant with regard to

each complaint. The agency certified that the proposed settlements

were offers of full relief. Complainant was advised that if the offers

of full relief were not accepted within thirty calendar days, a final

agency decision would be issued dismissing his complaints.

In its decision dated August 5, 1997, the agency consolidated the three

complaints under Agency No. 1A-086-1029-96 and dismissed the complaints

for failure to accept a certified offer of full relief. The agency

determined that complainant failed to respond to the offers within the

30-day time frame. Thereafter, complainant filed an appeal with the

Commission.

In the previous decision, the Commission affirmed the agency's decision.

Thereafter, complainant filed the instant request for reconsideration.

Complainant contends that the agency failed to offer him restoration of

the full amount of leave to which he is entitled. Complainant claims

that the agency did not include in its settlement offers the 78.66

hours of sick leave that he was charged during periods in 1993 and 1994.

In response, the agency asserts that complainant has failed to satisfy

the criteria of a request for reconsideration.

On November 9, 1999, after the issuance of the previous decision,

revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal sector complaint

process went into effect. These regulations apply to all Federal sector

EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative process.

Under these revisions, the Commission eliminated the dismissal basis of

failure to accept a certified offer of full relief from the regulations.

See 64 Federal Register 37,644, 37,645 (1999). In other words,

agencies may no longer dismiss administrative EEO complaints due to

a complainant's failure to accept a certified offer of full relief.

Any dismissal on the grounds of failure to accept a certified offer of

full relief is now improper under the revised regulations. Therefore,

we find that as a result of applying our revised regulations to the

instant matter, the prior decision must be reversed and the agency's

grounds for dismissal is no longer appropriate. See Michael L. Dailey

v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05981032 (May 26, 2000).

After a review of the complainant's request for reconsideration, the

previous decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that

the request meets the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and it is

the decision of the Commission to grant the request. The decision of

the Commission in EEOC Appeal No. 01980048 is hereby REVERSED, and the

agency's decision dismissing the consolidated complaint is REVERSED.

The consolidated complaint is REMANDED to the agency for further

processing in accordance with this decision and the Order set forth

herein.

ORDER (E0900)

The agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with

29 C.F.R. � 1614.108. The agency shall acknowledge to the complainant

that it has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar

days of the date this decision becomes final. The agency shall issue

to complainant a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify

complainant of the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150)

calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, unless the matter

is otherwise resolved prior to that time. If the complainant requests a

final decision without a hearing, the agency shall issue a final decision

within sixty (60) days of receipt of complainant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgment to complainant and a

copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of

rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0900)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)

calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The

report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to

the complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of

the order. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the right

to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order

prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29

C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(g). Alternatively,

the complainant has the right to file a civil action on the underlying

complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File

A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action

for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying complaint is subject

to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. � 2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the

complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the

complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION

(R0900)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date

that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. 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. Filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)

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:

______________________________

Frances M. Hart

Executive Officer

Executive Secretariat

February 2, 2001

__________________

Date

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify

that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

__________________

Date

______________________________

1 On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's

federal sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations

apply to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in

the administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply

the revised regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.