Harold T. Dunn, Complainant,v.Ray H. LaHood, Secretary, Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 7, 2012
0520120557 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 7, 2012)

0520120557

12-07-2012

Harold T. Dunn, Complainant, v. Ray H. LaHood, Secretary, Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration), Agency.


Harold T. Dunn,

Complainant,

v.

Ray H. LaHood,

Secretary,

Department of Transportation

(Federal Aviation Administration),

Agency.

Request No. 0520120557

Appeal No. 0120121899

Agency No. 201224330FAA03

DENIAL

Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Harold T. Dunn v. Department of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 0120121899 (July 20, 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).

On January 31, 2012, Complainarit filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected him to discrimination on the basis of reprisal for prior protected EEO activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when a manager, who had previously been removed from the facility after Complainant and his co-workers complained about him, was reassigned to Complainant's facility and had a schedule parallel to Complainant's. Complainant did not identify any specific incidents involving the manager other than he had returned to the facility. Complainant stated that he felt this created a hostile work environment for him.

The previous decision, finding that Complainant failed to state a claim of harassment because he was unable to identify any actions involving the manager, affirmed the Agency's dismissal of the complaint. The decision also noted that there was no indication that the manager had any supervisory authority over Complainant. In his reconsideration request, Complainant argues, without providing any documentary evidence, the manger is indeed in his chain of command, i.e., his second-level supervisor. Furthermore, Complainant argues that the manager, in the past, used his position to abuse Complainant's rights and that his return creates a hostile environment. Complainant invites the Commission to review past complaints filed against the manager by Complainant and others.

We remind Complainant 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. 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. Here, we find no evidence that Complainant has met the criteria for reconsideration. Even if we assume for purposes of this decision that the manager does have supervisory authority over Complainant, the fact remains that the previous decision correctly determined that Complainant failed to state a claim of harassment because he was unable to identify any present actions involving the manager that could be determined to be discriminatory. Complainant's speculation that the manager, because of his past, may take actions in the future does not establish a claim of harassment.

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. 0120121899 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

___12/7/12_______________

Date

2

0520120557

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0520120557