[Redacted], Justin P,1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Dec 6, 2022

Appeal No. 2022003660 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 6, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Justin P,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency. Appeal No. 2022003660 Agency No. 4B-230-0179-22 DECISION Complainant filed a timely appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) from the Agency's decision dated June 10, 2022, dismissing his complaint alleging unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. BACKGROUND During the relevant time, Complainant worked for the Agency as a Labor Custodian in Fredericksburg, Virginia. On May 6, 2022, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected him to discrimination on the bases of religion, disability, age, and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: 1. He learned that his former Officer-in-Charge lied on an affidavit taken in his previously filed complaint; and 2. his former supervisor did not accept a grievance in April 2008 which resulted in 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. 2022003660 2 Complainant not being awarded the position of Vehicle Operations and Maintenance Assistant. The Agency dismissed the matter in its entirety for alleging the dissatisfaction with the processing of a prior complaint in accordance with EEOC Regulation C.F.R, § 1614.107(8). This appeal followed. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Dissatisfaction with Processing of Prior Complaint: Claim 1 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(8) provides that the Agency shall dismiss a complaint that alleges dissatisfaction with the processing of a previously filed complaint. These types of complaints are commonly referred to as “spin off” complaints, and they do not state an independent claim. Here, we conclude the Agency properly dismissed claim 1 for alleging dissatisfaction with the processing of a previously filed complaint. In claim 1, Complainant is challenging actions by a witness in a previously filed EEO complaint. Specifically, according to the EEO Counselor's Report, Complainant alleged that his supervisor lied in an affidavit taken in a prior EEO complaint. We find that Complainant is alleging dissatisfaction with alleged actions taken during the processing of his previously filed EEO complaint, which does not constitute an independent claim and was properly dismissed. See Wayne C. v. Dep't of Veteran Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120171303 (May 18, 2017) (affirming agency's dismissal for alleging dissatisfaction with a previously filed complaint when a complainant alleged that an agency attorney failed to respond to a Motion to Compel and conspired against him in the hearing process regarding a prior complaint). Same Claim as Previously Adjudicated Complaint: Claim 2 We find that claim 2 is more properly dismissed under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(1), which provides, in relevant part, that the Agency shall dismiss a complaint that states the same claim that is pending before or has been decided by the Agency or Commission. In claim 2, Complainant specifically contests the failure to award him the position of Vehicle Operations and Maintenance Assistant. However, this claim is identical in all relevant aspects to a previously filed EEO complaint that has already been adjudicated by this Commission. See EEOC Appeal No. 0120090466 (April 14. 2009), request for reconsideration denied, EEOC Request No. 0520080388 (May 28, 2009), where we found no discrimination was established with respect to the failure to select Complainant for the position of Vehicle Operations and Maintenance Assistant on April 28, 2008. Therefore, this matter has already been adjudicated. 2022003660 3 CONCLUSION Accordingly, we AFFIRM for the reasons set forth herein, the Agency’s final decision dismissing the formal complaint. STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0920) The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or evidence that tend to establish 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. Requests for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. If the party requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for reconsideration. A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). Complainant should submit his or her request for reconsideration, and any statement or brief in support of his or her request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx Alternatively, Complainant can submit his or her request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFO receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of service on the other party, unless Complainant files his or her request via the EEOC Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required. 2022003660 4 Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted together with the request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(c). COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0610) 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. If you file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint. 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 December 6, 2022 Date