0520130264
05-30-2013
Charles Talley, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Eastern Area), Agency.
Charles Talley,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Eastern Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520130264
Appeal No. 0120122773
Agency No. 4C-370-0034-12
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Charles Talley v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120122773 (December 13, 2012). 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).
In the underlying case, Complainant contacted an EEO Counselor on January 4, 2012 and subsequently filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against him on the basis of disability when: (1) prior to his disability retirement in 2005, it denied him reasonable accommodation, denied him leave, requested medical documentation for his absences, failed to address the safety issues he raised, followed him to the restroom, issued him discipline, disclosed his private information, opened his personal letters, and delayed and falsified his disability retirement application; and (2) after he was diagnosed with a medical condition in 2011, he was required to provide medical evidence to the Department of Labor's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) showing that his condition was related to his initial accident in 1993 or factors of his employment when he returned to duty.
The appellate decision affirmed the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.107(a)(1)-(2) for untimely EEO Counselor contact and for failure to state a claim. Regarding claim 1, the appellate decision found that Complainant's January 4, 2012 EEO Counselor contact occurred more than 45 days after the matters alleged to be discriminatory. Regarding claim 2, the appellate decision found that it constituted a collateral attack on the OWCP process.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant argued that the Agency has continued to discriminate against him. Specifically, Complainant asserted that the Agency previously falsified his SF-3112 ("Documentation in Support of Disability Retirement Application") and that each use of the falsified SF-3112 during the OWCP process constitutes further discrimination.
Upon review, we find that Complainant's request for reconsideration does not demonstrate that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or that the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Regarding claim 1, the record reflects that although the matters alleged to be discriminatory occurred prior to Complainant's retirement in 2005, Complainant did not contact an EEO Counselor until 2012. Regarding claim 2, we agree with the appellate decision that Complainant's allegation regarding the submission of a falsified SF-3112 during the OWCP process constitutes a collateral attack upon the OWCP process.
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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120122773 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
____5/30/13______________
Date
2
0520130264
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
3
0520130264