0520120175
05-09-2012
Imtiaz A. Khan, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Great Lakes Area), Agency.
Imtiaz A. Khan,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Great Lakes Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120175
Appeal No. 0120113044
Agency No. 4J600013710
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Imtiaz A. Khan v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120113044 (November 1, 2011). 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).
BACKGROUND
In the underlying case, Complainant alleged he was discriminated against on the bases of race (Middle Eastern), national origin (not specified), sex (Male), religion (Muslim), color (brown), age (over 40), and in reprisal for prior EEO activity when:
1. from August 3, 2010 to the present, the Postmaster followed him, watched him, and instructed him repeatedly and disrespectfully; and
2. on August 11, 2010, he was issued a Letter of Warning for failure to follow instructions and for failure to perform the duties of his position.
Complaint requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). On April 27, 2011, the AJ issued a summary judgment decision in favor of the Agency. The Agency fully implemented the AJ's decision. Specifically, the AJ found that Complainant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he was discriminated against on any of the alleged bases. Regarding Complainant's harassment claim, the AJ found that the alleged harassment was insufficiently severe or pervasive so as to create a hostile work environment. We issued an appellate decision affirming the Agency's final action because we found that the AJ's issuance of a decision without a hearing was appropriate, and because a review of the record evidence did not establish that unlawful discrimination occurred.
ARGUMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates many of the allegations he made on appeal regarding the daily "torture" he experienced at the hands of the Postmaster. Additionally, Complainant raises new incidences of harassment by the Postmaster which were not the subject of the underlying appeal. Complainant also requested to be transferred to another post office. In response to Complainant's request for reconsideration, the Agency requests that the Commission deny the request for reconsideration and affirm the previous appellate decision.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Complainant is reminded 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), Ch. 9 � VII.A. (Nov. 9, 1999). Because Complainant has not put forth any arguments or contentions that were not previously considered in rendering the underlying decision, or were the subject of the underlying appeal, the Commission finds that Complainant has not demonstrated that the underlying decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law. Neither has Complainant argued or demonstrated that the underlying decision would have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency.
CONCLUSION
After reconsidering 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. 0120111134 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
____5/9/12______________
Date
2
0520120175
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120175