0520130017
03-22-2013
Gwendolyn R. Payton, Complainant, v. Ray H. LaHood, Secretary, Department of Transportation ((Federal Transit Administration), Agency.
Gwendolyn R. Payton,
Complainant,
v.
Ray H. LaHood,
Secretary,
Department of Transportation
((Federal Transit Administration),
Agency.
Request No. 0520130017
Appeal No. 0120110706
Hearing No. 440-2010-00116X
Agency No. 2007-21565-FTA-05
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Gwendolyn R. Payton v. Department of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110706 (September 5, 2012). 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 a complaint, dated October 13, 2007, Complainant alleged that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African-American), sex (female), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when effective August 3, 2007, she was removed from federal service during her probationary period.
In a final decision, the Agency found that Complainant failed to prove that she was subjected to unlawful discrimination. In our previous decision, the Commission found that the Agency articulated legitimate, discriminatory reasons for Complainant's termination, i.e., performance, behavior, and poor judgment, which the Agency elaborated upon in detail in its July 24, 2007, termination letter. The Commission further found that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency's explanations were pretext for unlawful discrimination.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates arguments she raised during the investigation and on appeal, including her claim that she was justified in standing firm during an altercation with the Regional Administrator's secretary because she felt physically unsafe. Complainant further contends that 100 e-mails indicate that she performed beyond expectations, produced exceptional work products, and conducted timely grant processing.
Upon review, we find that our previous decision properly found that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency's explanations were pretext for unlawful discrimination. 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.
Accordingly, 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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to DENY the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120110706 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
March 22, 2013
Date
2
0520130017
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520130017