Gulam Dean, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 30, 2002
05A00381 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 30, 2002)

05A00381

04-30-2002

Gulam Dean, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.


Gulam Dean v. United States Postal Service

05A00381

April 30, 2002

.

Gulam Dean,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(Southeast Area),

Agency.

Request No. 05A00381

Appeal No. 01984352

Agency No. 4H-3350-154-97

DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Gulam Dean (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider

the decision in Gulam Dean v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal

No. 01984352 (February 4, 2000). Complainant alleged discrimination

based upon his race (Indian), color (brown), religion (Muslim), and

national origin (India), when he was allegedly subjected to a hostile

work environment at the agency's St. Petersburg, Florida Open Air Station

(Open Air Station) from December 1996 through March 1997.

EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion,

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).

After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, 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.<1> The decision

in EEOC Appeal No. 01984352 remains the Commission's final decision.

There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of

the Commission on this 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

April 30, 2002

__________________

Date

1 The substance of complainant's assertions in his request for

reconsideration relate to issues that are not relevant to the claims

herein. Complainant also argues that he did not complain �time to time

because no management [official] was paying attention.� In addition,

complainant explains that he �did not complain [about the harassment]

because he was moved to different post offices.� We do not find such

statements sufficient in establishing that the previous decision was

erroneous.