0520130352
09-05-2013
Ali Caspiani, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Ali Caspiani,
Complainant,
v.
Eric K. Shinseki,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request No. 0520130352
Appeal No. 0120123208
Hearing No. 550-2011-00380X
Agency No. 200P00102010104685
DENIAL
Complainant requested reconsideration of the decision in Ali Caspiani v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 01-2012-3208 (January 15, 2013). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to 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).
BACKGROUND
In the appellate decision, Complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination on the bases of national origin (Iranian) and age (57) when, on August 4, 2010, he was terminated from his position as a Program Specialist during his probationary period. An EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) issued a decision without a hearing finding that Complainant failed to show that he was subjected to discrimination. Specifically, the AJ found that the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions, namely, that Complainant was terminated during his probationary period because of his inability to improve his performance despite the training the Agency provided. Noted was Complainant's lack of speed in resolving multiple issues. The AJ found that Complainant failed to show that the Agency's reasons were pretext for discrimination. Therefore, the AJ determined that Complainant failed to prove that he was subjected to discrimination. The Agency fully implemented the AJ's decision. The Commission affirmed the finding of no discrimination.
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION CONTENTIONS
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant explains that he had successfully worked for twenty-five years for the State of California doing the same job duties as the Program Specialist. He asserts that he never was concerned about the probationary period because of his vast years of experience. He indicates that he was told that he was performing slowly but told his trainer that it was due to the fact that he was older. Complainant contends that once this trainer learned that he was from Iraq he unfairly targeted him because the trainer was an Iraq war veteran. Complainant requests a hearing because he believes that the AJ did not consider his length of experience, did not consider that performance appraisals were not completed in a timely manner, and did not consider that his offer letter did not indicate that there was a probationary period.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. We find that Complainant argues issues that were previously addressed by the AJ. Moreover, other than his conclusory statements, Complainant has not offered any evidence which suggests that discriminatory animus was involved in the decision to terminate him. In fact, Complainant acknowledges that his work pace was slow. Further, the record shows that other employees, in addition to his trainer, found Complainant's work to be unacceptable. We find that Complainant has failed to establish that the Agency's articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons were pretext for discrimination or that he was entitled to a hearing. Accordingly, the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120123208 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 (Z0610)
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 from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also 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 with the Court 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
__9/5/13________________
Date
2
0520130352
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520130352