0520110432
10-13-2011
Dorothy Pritchett, Complainant, v. Stephen Chu, Secretary, Department of Energy, Agency.
Dorothy Pritchett,
Complainant,
v.
Stephen Chu,
Secretary,
Department of Energy,
Agency.
Request No. 0520110432
Appeal No. 0120102412
Hearing No. 570-2009-0070X
Agency No. 08-00028-HQ-EI
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Dorothy
Pritchett v. Department of Energy, EEOC Appeal No. 0120102412 (March
28, 2011). 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 our previous decision, we affirmed the EEOC Administrative Judge's
(AJ) decision without a hearing finding no discrimination. We noted that
the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for not
selecting Complainant to the position of Management and Program Analyst,
GS-14. Specifically, we noted that the Agency explained that Complainant
performed very poorly in the interview, i.e., gave non-responsive answers,
had very little experience in the areas the job was designed for, and was
unable to give specific examples of the knowledge, skills and abilities
she possessed related to the job. We also noted that Complainant failed
to rebut the Agency's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for not
selecting her.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant alleges, in pertinent
part, that the selectee was preselected when she was temporarily
appointed to position at issue. Complainant further alleges that,
unlike the selectee, she was not given the opportunity to perform GS-14
duties. Complainant alleges that her second-level supervisor (S2) wanted
to be certain that she would never be promoted. Complainant also alleges
that members of the selection panel received benefits for choosing the
selectee instead of her.
We note that S2 was not the selecting official and had no role in the
selection process. We also can find no evidence that any member of the
selection panel received benefits for choosing the selectee instead
of Complainant. Further, we remind Complainant that a request for
reconsideration is not a second form of appeal. E.g., Lopez v. Dep’t of
Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007); EEO Management
Directive for Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), Chap. 9, §VII.A. (Nov. 9, 1999).
After reconsidering 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. 0120102412 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
October 13, 2011
Date
2
0520110432
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520110432