05a30198
03-13-2003
Donald C. Hall, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Donald C. Hall v. United States Postal Service
05A30198
03-13-03
.
Donald C. Hall,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Request No. 05A30198
Appeal No. 01A13791
Agency No. 4E-890-0098-99
Hearing No. 340-A0-X3399
DECISION ON REQUEST TO RECONSIDER
On September 7, 2001, Donald C. Hall (complainant) timely initiated a
request to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the Commission) to
reconsider the decision in Donald C. Hall v. John E. Potter, Postmaster
General, United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A13791
(August 28, 2001). EEOC regulations provide that the Commission may,
in its discretion, reconsider any previous decision where the party
demonstrates that: (1) the previous decision involved a clearly
erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) the decision
will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices or operation of
the agency. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b). For the reasons set forth below,
the complainant's request is denied.
The issue presented for decision is whether the complainant's request
meets the criteria for reconsideration.
Complainant filed a formal complaint of discrimination claiming that
because of his age (DOB 9-19-1946), he was not transferred to another
facility. After an investigation, complainant requested a hearing
before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). She held a hearing and
issued a decision on March 16, 2001, finding that complainant failed to
demonstrate that the agency's explanation, i.e., that he did not submit
the necessary paperwork, was not the true reason or was a mask or sham
for discrimination. In his request, complainant contended that agency
officials made false statements and that the agency has no system for
processing transfers. In fact, included in the record is a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) between the parties which provides for employees
seeking transfer and states that they must complete certain paperwork.<1>
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 form of 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). Complainant's 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 a
careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the complainant's
request does not meet the regulatory criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
CONCLUSION
After a review of the complainant's request for reconsideration, the
previous decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that the
complainant's request fails to meet any of the criteria of 29 C.F.R. �
1614.405(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny the
complainant's request. The decision of the Commission in EEOC Appeal
No. 01A13791 (August 28, 2001) remains the Commission's final decision.
There is no further right of administrative appeal from a decision of
the Commission on a request for reconsideration.
STATEMENT OF COMPLAINANT'S RIGHTS - ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
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
____03-13-03______________
Date
1Complainant also contended that his veterans' preference should
afford him consideration for transfer; however, this Commission has no
jurisdiction over such matters.