[Redacted], Von E., 1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sep 9, 2020

Appeal No. 0120172782 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 9, 2020)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Von E.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency. Request No. 2020001912 Appeal No. 0120172782 Agency No. 1K-206-0002-17 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Von E. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120172782 (Oct. 26, 2018). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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). Complainant, a Parcel Post Distribution Clerk at the Agency's Southern Maryland Processing and Distribution Center in Capital Heights, Maryland, filed the underlying complaint wherein he claimed that he was discriminated against and subjected to a hostile work environment on the bases of his national origin (Uganda), age (55) and in reprisal for his prior EEO activity when: 1. On October 14-19, 2016, Complainant was placed on emergency placement in an off- duty status; 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. 2020001912 2 2. Since October 20, 2016, and on December 25, 2016 and December 30, 2016, Complainant’s Supervisor was critical of his work; and 3. Since October 20, 2016, and on December 25, 2016 and December 30, 2016, Complainant’s Supervisor has spoken in a loud manner. Following an investigation, Complainant requested that the Agency issue a final decision. The Agency issued a final decision finding that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination, reprisal, or a hostile work environment as alleged. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision. Therein, we determined that Complainant failed to show that the Agency’s articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions were pretextual. Accordingly, the Commission found that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination, reprisal, or a hostile work environment as alleged. In his request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses his disagreement with the appellate decision and reiterates several arguments previously made on appeal. The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. 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. Upon review of Complainant’s request to reconsider, we find that Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission’s decision. Complainant has failed to establish that he was discriminated against or subjected to a hostile work environment on the bases of either his national origin, age, or reprisal with respect to the matters at issue. 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. 0120172782 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. 2020001912 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 September 9, 2020 Date