0520140428
02-06-2015
Complainant v. Anthony Foxx, Secretary, Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration), Agency.
Complainant
v.
Anthony Foxx,
Secretary,
Department of Transportation
(Federal Highway Administration),
Agency.
Request No. 0520140428
Appeal No. 0120140969
Agency No. 2012-24560-FHWA-02
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120140969 (May 2, 2014). 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(c).
The previous decision affirmed the Agency's determination that it had not breached an August 23, 2013, settlement agreement between Complainant and the Agency. The agreement provided, in relevant part, as follows:
6. The parties agree not to disclose this agreement or any matters discussed during mediation, except to those who have a need to know in an official capacity.
By letter to the Agency dated November 11, 2013, Complainant alleged that the Agency had breached the settlement agreement. He asserted that, on October 10, 2013, he "met an individual who is not with" the Agency and who attended a September 2013 retirement party for an Agency Director. According to Complainant, the individual told him that the retiring Director "disclosed the details about the agreement." Noting that Complainant did not identify the individual in question or the details that were allegedly disclosed, the Agency concluded that Complainant's breach allegation was "a bare assertion without sufficiently particular evidence or facts."
In our previous decision, we found that Complainant had not provided any details about the alleged breach of the settlement agreement. In that regard, we noted that he had offered no specifics about the information that was disclosed or the person to whom it was disclosed. Accordingly, we found that Complainant had not shown that the Agency breached the settlement agreement.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant asserts that a named individual "recently" told him that the retired Director spoke with the individual during the retirement party and "explained to [the individual] what happened" to Complainant. Complainant further asserts that the individual is a retired Agency employee and has no need to know the details of Complainant's separation from the Agency.
In response, the Agency argues that Complainant's request does not meet the criteria for reconsideration.
We remind Complainant that a "request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission." Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here.
Complainant's identification, in his request for reconsideration, of the individual to whom information allegedly was disclosed does not establish that the previous decision erred. As the previous decision correctly found, Complainant's November 2013 letter provided no specific information about the individual or the alleged disclosure. Further, Complainant's assertion that the retired Director discussed "what happened" is similarly lacking in specificity. Complainant has not identified what, exactly, the Director allegedly disclosed. Complainant has not shown that the previous decision was clearly erroneous or will have a substantial impact on the Agency.
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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120140969 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
February 6, 2015
Date
2
0520140428
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520140428