Sherrie L. McCants, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 23, 1998
05970329 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 23, 1998)

05970329

11-23-1998

Sherrie L. McCants, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Sherrie L. McCants v. United States Postal Service

05970329

November 23, 1998

Sherrie L. McCants, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Request No. 05970329

) Appeal No. 01962583

William J. Henderson, ) Agency No. 1-C-441-1138-95

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

)

)

DENIAL OF REQUEST TO RECONSIDER

On December 24, 1996, the United States Postal Service,(hereinafter

referred to as the agency) timely initiated a request to the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (Commission) to reconsider the decision

in Sherrie L. McCants v. Marvin T. Runyon, Jr., Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01962583 (November 22,

1996) received on November 25, 1996. EEOC regulations provide that the

Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider any previous decision.

29 C.F.R. �1614.407(a). The party requesting reconsideration must submit

written argument or evidence which tends to establish one or more of

the following three criteria: new and material evidence is available

that was not readily available when the previous decision was issued,

29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c)(1); the previous decision involved an erroneous

interpretation of law, regulation, or material fact, or a misapplication

of established policy, 29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c)(2); and the decision is of

such exceptional nature as to have substantial precedential implications,

29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c)(3).

After a review of the agency's request for reconsideration, the previous

decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that the agency's

request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. �1614.407(c), and it is

the decision of the Commission to deny the request.<1> The decision in

EEOC Appeal No. 01962583 (November 22, 1996) remains the Commission's

final decision. The agency is directed to comply with the order of the

previous decision, as Modified below. There is no further right of

administrative appeal from a decision of the Commission on this request

for reconsideration.

ORDER

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded allegations in accordance

with 29 C.F.R. �1614.108. Initially, however, the agency shall afford

appellant the opportunity to meet with an EEO Counselor in order to

more closely define the substance of her allegations of harassment. The

agency shall acknowledge to the appellant that it has received the

remanded allegations within thirty (30) calendar days of the date the

agency receives this decision. The agency shall issue to appellant a

copy of the investigative file and also shall notify appellant of the

appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150) calendar days of the

date the agency receives this decision, unless the matter is otherwise

resolved prior to that time. If the appellant requests a final decision

without a hearing, the agency shall issue a final decision within sixty

(60) days of receipt of appellant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgement to appellant and a copy

of the correspondence that transmits the investigative file and notice

of rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0595)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory. The

agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar

days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The report

shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to the

appellant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's order, the

appellant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 29

C.F.R. �1614.503(a). The appellant also has the right to file a civil

action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior to or

following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29 C.F.R. ��

1614.408, 1614.409, and 1614.503(g). Alternatively, the appellant has the

right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance

with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File A Civil Action." 29

C.F.R. �� 1614.408 and 1614.409. A civil action for enforcement or a civil

action on the underlying complaint is subject to the deadline stated in

42 U.S.C. � 2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the appellant files a civil

action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any

petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.410.

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0993)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court. It is the position of the Commission that 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. You should be aware, however, that courts in some

jurisdictions have interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner

suggesting that a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS from the date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your

civil action is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN

THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision

or to consult an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the

jurisdiction in which your action would be filed. In the alternative,

you may file a civil action AFTER ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY (180) CALENDAR

DAYS of the date you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your

appeal with the Commission. 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.

Filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of

your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1092)

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:

NOV 23, 1998

Date Frances M. Hart

Executive Officer

Executive Secretariat

1In holding that appellant's allegations of harassment herein state a

claim, the previous decision referenced the Commission's decision in

Osborne v. Dept. of Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05960111 (July 19, 1996).

The Commission has recently clarified a similar reference and discussed

the requirements set forth in its decision in Cobb v. Dept. of the Treasury,

EEOC Request No. 05970077 (March 13, 1997) in order for a harassment

allegation to state a claim under our regulations. See Riden v. Dept. of

the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970314 (October 2, 1998). In this case,

however, we note that appellant's allegation of a work schedule change

would state a claim independently of her allegations of harassment.