0520080398
05-01-2008
Alice Chen, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Alice Chen,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Request No. 0520080398
Appeal No. 0120064646
Agency No. 1F927000806
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Alice
Chen v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120064646 (March
6, 2008). 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).
The Commission's previous decision affirmed the agency's final decision
that it did not discriminate against complainant when she was not
selected for the position of Tool and Parts Clerk at the Pomona,
California, Vehicle Maintenance Facility, in November 2005. At the
time of her complaint, complainant worked as a full-time Mail Processing
Clerk at the Processing and Distribution Center in Anaheim, California.
She claimed discrimination based on race (Asian), disability (right
shoulder, lower back, cervical), and in reprisal for prior EEO activity.
The record reveals that complainant was interviewed by the selection
panel, and the panel found that she did not demonstrate an ability to
use reference materials and manuals and to respond to instructions,
and that her rating was lower than the selectee. The agency found that
it articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its selection
decision and concluded that complainant did not demonstrate that its
reasons were a pretext, or a sham or disguise, for discrimination.
In her request for reconsideration, complainant stated that she had
applied for 21 jobs since 1999; she provided documents showing that she
passed some agency tests; and she provided examples of her answers to
the selection panel's questions. In order to merit the reconsideration
of a prior decision, the requesting party must submit written argument
that tends to establish that at least one of the criteria of 29 C.F.R. �
1614.405(b) is met. The Commission's scope of review on a request for
reconsideration is narrow and is not merely a second appeal. Lopez
v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05890749 (September 28,
1989); Regensberg v. USPS, EEOC Request No. 05900850 (September 7, 1990).
The Commission finds that the complainant's request does not meet the
regulatory criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), in that, the request does
not identify a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law,
nor does it show that the underlying decision will have a substantial
impact on the policies, practices or operation of the agency.
After reconsidering 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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120064646 remains the
Commission's final decision. There is no further right of administrative
appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request.
NOTICE OF COMPLAINANT'S RIGHTS - REQUEST TO RECONSIDER
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
______05-01-2008____________
Date
2
0520080398
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C. 20036
3
0520080398