0520140178
07-11-2014
Complainant v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.
Complainant
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southeast Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520140178
Appeal No. 0120130267
Hearing No. 510-2011-00575X
Agency No. 1Y-520-0046-11
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120130267 (January 8, 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).
During the relevant time period, Complainant was employed as a Full-Time Ramp Clerk at the Agency's International Service Center in Miami, Florida. Complainant filed an EEO complaint that alleged that the Agency discriminated against him on the bases of race (Caucasian), sex (male), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when, on or about February 23, 2011, Agency management denied Complainant's request for a temporary change of schedule.
On January 8, 2014, an AJ issued a summary judgment decision in favor of the Agency. The AJ determined that the evidence established that Complainant's regular schedule provided for Saturday and Sunday as his days off, and that Complainant's supervisor (Manager 1) approved a temporary schedule change from January 2011 through March 4, 2011, so that Complainant could coach his son's youth soccer team. The AJ further determined that, under the approved schedule change, Complainant's days off were Saturday and Sunday, but during this period, the Agency granted Complainant annual leave on Thursdays to coach the team.
The AJ noted that, on February 23, 2011, Complainant requested to extend his temporary schedule for the period from March 19, 2011, until April 22, 2011, but Manager 1 denied Complainant's request on the basis of the "needs of the service" because Complainant's revised schedule created operational difficulties by limiting other Ramp Clerks' leave usage. The AJ further noted that Complainant then discussed the matter with the Plant Manager, and the Plant Manager agreed to allow Complainant to extend his revised schedule by giving him a three-week extension instead of the requested four-week extension. However, the Plant Manager stated that when he informed Complainant that he (Complainant) had failed to properly fill out the request form for the extension, Complainant responded, "You know what, forget it."
The AJ found that Complainant did not suffer harm to the conditions, terms, or privileges of her employment because he essentially withdrew his request. The AJ further found that, even if Complainant were subjected to an adverse action, Complainant failed to provide any evidence to rebut the Agency's legitimate, non-discriminatory explanations for its actions. The Agency adopted the AJ's findings in its final order, and our previous decision affirmed the Agency's final order.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant contends that the AJ relied solely on the affidavits of Agency managers, although the managers committed perjury. Complainant further contends that his request for a mutual swap of schedules with other employees would have allowed him to coach his son's soccer team and would not have adversely impacted Agency operations.
We note 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 the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here.
Therefore, 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. 0120130267 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
July 11, 2014
Date
2
0520140178
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520140178