0520140097
04-29-2014
Complainant v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Headquarters), Agency.
Complainant
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Headquarters),
Agency.
Request No. 0520140097
Appeal No. 0120132139
Agency No. F06C-4F-C08098991
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120132139 (November 14, 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(c).
In our previous decision, we affirmed the Agency's dismissal of Complainant's complaint for stating the same claim that has already been decided by the Agency or Commission. In her complaint, Complainant alleged that that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the bases of disability and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when, on or about October 1, 2007, following her prolonged absence from work due to the death of a family member, Complainant sought to return to work but was asked for a doctor's note and was subsequently refused the right to work.
We noted that Complainant alleged the same claim in EEOC Appeal No. 0120081975 (June 5, 2008), request for reconsideration denied, EEOC Request No. 0520080609 (August 1, 2008). Therein, we affirmed the Agency's dismissal of Complainant's claim for untimely EEO Counselor contact. As such, we found that the Agency properly dismissed Complainant's complaint for stating the same claim that had already been decided.1
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant points out that our decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120113339 did not dismiss, but remanded essentially the same claim to the Agency for further processing pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105.
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 (2) will have a substantial impact on me policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here. Complainant does not dispute that her instant claim is the same claim indentified in Appeal No. 0120081975, which was dismissed. We also note that the Agency's April 20, 2013, final decision found that the remanded claim in Appeal No. 0120113339 is the same claim in Appeal No. 0120081975.
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. 0120132139 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
April 29, 2014
Date
1 In EEOC Appeal No. 0120113339 (March 27, 2012), we remanded Complainant's claim pertaining to the prolonged absence from work to the Agency for further processing.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0520140097
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520140097