05a00566
01-11-2001
Richard Becker, Complainant, v. Hershel W. Gober, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Richard Becker v. Department of Veterans Affairs
05A00566, 05A00567, 05A00568
January 11, 2001
.
Richard Becker,
Complainant,
v.
Hershel W. Gober,
Acting Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request Nos. 05A00566, 05A00567, 05A00568
Appeal Nos. 01992313, 01994773, 01994549
Agency Nos. 200H-0632-2889, 200R-0632-98-4149, 200H-0632-4572
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
On March 31, 2000, complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision
in Richard Becker v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal
Nos. 01992313, 01994773, 01994549 (March 28, 2000).<1> In response, on
May 9, 2000, the agency submitted a cross-request for reconsideration.
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. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
After a review of the requests for reconsideration, the previous decision,
and the entire record, the Commission finds that both requests fail to
meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
The previous decision consolidated three appeals stemming from complaints
in which complainant alleged sex, age, and disability discrimination
and retaliation. Complainant raised seven claims in these complaints,
certain of which were identical to one another. In essence, complainant
claimed that he was not hired, transferred, or reassigned to the Veterans
Canteen Service (VCS), he was denied a light duty assignment, and he
was harassed. The previous decision affirmed the agency's dismissal of a
number of complainant's claims, but remanded the following three claims
for further processing: (1) whether complainant was denied employment
with the VCS after applying for a job in response to a recruitment
advertisement in the winter of 1998; (2) whether complainant was treated
less favorably than female nurses in terms of light duty requests; and
(3) whether the first two claims created a hostile work environment.
In his request for reconsideration, complainant simply restates arguments
made on appeal and offers no coherent argument to support either criteria
for reconsideration. Accordingly, it is the decision of the Commission
to deny his request.
In its cross-request for reconsideration, the agency argues that the
previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of fact
because complainant's claim that he was denied employment with the VCS
in the winter of 1998 is the same claim as that raised in EEOC Appeal
No. 01954438 (February 28, 1997). The agency concludes that its dismissal
was therefore proper. We note, however, that in Appeal No. 01954438
complainant claimed he was discriminated against when he was denied
a job at the VCS in the spring of 1993. This is not the same claim
as the subject claim, as it involves an event that occurred five years
earlier. Accordingly, the agency has not established that the previous
decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of fact or law.
Nor did the agency present an argument that the previous decision will
have a substantial impact on its policies, practices, or operations.
Accordingly, the agency's request for reconsideration is denied.
The decision in EEOC Appeal Nos. 01992313, 01994773, 01994549
remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further right of
administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request
for reconsideration.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)
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 (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:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
January 11, 2001
Date
1On 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.