Wilbert W.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency.Download PDFEqual Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 29, 20192019000760 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 29, 2019) Copy Citation U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Wilbert W.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency. Request No. 2019000760 Appeal No. 0120162620 Agency No. 4E-980-0062-14, 4E-980-0026-15 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120162620 (September 6, 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). The record reflects the following chronology of events. Complainant worked as an Automotive Technician, Level-P-08, at the Agency’s Vehicle Maintenance Facility (VMF) in Tacoma, Washington. On October 1, 2014, Complainant filed Complaint No. 4E-980-0062-14, in which he alleged that the VMF Manager subjected to a hostile work environment based on disability (high blood pressure) when: 1. On or about November 8, 2013, Complainant became aware that he would not be promoted to a level 9 position. 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. 2 2019000760 2. On November 8, 2013, Complainant was put “off the clock” for a medical condition and not provided light duty. 3. On an unspecified date in November 2013, Complainant was not afforded a 204B training detail. This formal complaint included other incidents as well. The Agency dismissed the entire complaint on various procedural dismissal grounds and Complainant appealed. On March 6, 2015, Complainant filed Complaint No. 4E-980-0026-15, which he alleged that he was subjected to a hostile work environment because of his disability (high blood pressure) and in reprisal for having filed Complaint No. 4E-980-0062-14 when: 4. On or about November 19, 2014, the VMF Manager advised him to request an accommodation from the District Reasonable Accommodation Committee (DRAC) to extend the period to treat his high blood pressure in order to qualify for a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL). As with the earlier formal complaint, the Agency dismissed Complaint No. 4E-980-0026-15 in its entirety, and Complainant appealed. In Complainant v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC 0120150842, 0120151811 (Dec. 13, 2015), the Commission consolidated the two complaints, remanded incidents (1) through (4) for processing and affirmed the Agency’s dismissal of the remaining incidents set forth in both complaints. At the conclusion of the remanded investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the investigative report and notice of his right to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). When Complainant did not request a hearing within the time frame provided in 29 C.F.R. § 1614.108(f), the Agency issued a final decision pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b). The decision concluded that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected him to discrimination as alleged. Complainant appealed. On appeal, Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. Specifically, the Commission reasoned that the incidents at issue did not rise to the level of harassment and the alleged actions were not based on Complainant’s protected classes. Complainant v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120162620 (September 6, 2018). Complainant filed the instant request for reconsideration. Complainant raises the same arguments raised below. We remind complainant that a "request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission." Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive 110 for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (Aug. 5, 2015), Chapter 9. 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. 3 2019000760 The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120162620 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. 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 March 29, 2019 Date Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation