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

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Aug 9, 2017

0520170281 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 9, 2017)

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

Peter L.,
Complainant,

v.

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

Request No. 0520170281

Appeal No. 0120150746

Hearing No. 430-2014-00138X

Agency No. 4K-230-0140-13

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Peter L. v. U.S. Postal Serv.,
EEOC Appeal No. 0120150746 (Mar. 10, 2017). 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(c).

On August 30, 2013, Complainant, a non-career probationary Postal Support Employee, filed a
formal EEO complaint claiming that the Agency discriminated against him on the bases of
religion (Christian Baptist), race (African-American), sex (male), age (58), and in reprisal for
prior protected EEO activity when, on April 24, 2013, he received a Notice of Termination.

Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ assigned to the case issued a
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.

0520170281

2
summary judgment decision finding that Complainant had not been subjected to discrimination
as alleged. The Agency subsequently issued a final order fully implementing the AJ’s decision.
Complainant appealed and, in Peter L. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120150746
(Mar. 10, 2017), the Commission affirmed the final order finding that Complainant failed to
show that the Agency’s reasons for its actions were pretext for unlawful discrimination or
reprisal.

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses his disagreement with the appellate
decision and reiterates his previous arguments. 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), Chap. 9 § VI.A (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 presented any evidence to
support reconsideration of the Commission’s finding that he failed to show that he was subjected
to discrimination or reprisal as alleged. As such, Complainant has not put forth any persuasive
arguments to support granting the request for reconsideration.

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. 0120150746 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.

0520170281

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

August 9, 2017
Date