0520070785
08-31-2007
Jennifer Brady, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Jennifer Brady,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Request No. 0520070785
Appeal No. 0120071019
Agency No. 1C451001906
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Jennifer
Brady v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120071019 (June
29, 2007). 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 the underlying case, complainant alleged that she was discriminated
against in violation of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq. Complainant requested a hearing
before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge
(AJ). The AJ issued a decision without a hearing finding that no genuine
issues of fact existed such that a hearing was warranted. The AJ found
that complainant failed to establish that she was discriminated against
as she alleged. The agency adopted the AJ's findings. Complainant
appealed that determination to the Commission. In Brady v. United
States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120071019 (June 29, 2007), the
Commission found that the AJ appropriately issued a decision without a
hearing and affirmed the agency's final order finding no discrimination.
Complainant filed this request for reconsideration with the Commission.
In complainant's request for reconsideration, complainant argues that
the AJ relied upon perjured testimony, that the underlying decision
contains errors of fact, that she provided evidence that she contacted
OPM, and that the agency did not provide a form 50 for a co-worker.
We find that these arguments fail to show either that the appellate
decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact
or law; or the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the
policies, practices, or operations of the agency. With regard to the
AJ's reliance on allegedly perjured testimony, the Commission reviewed the
underlying case de novo, and therefore the AJ's reliance upon any specific
evidence is not material. With regard to the errors of fact, complainant
points out that the underlying decision contains errors regarding dates.
However, we find that these errors are not material to the overall finding
that complainant failed to establish that a genuine issue of material
fact existed such that a hearing is warranted. Finally, with regard to
complainant's arguments that she provided evidence that she contacted
OPM, and that the agency did not provide a form 50 for a co-worker,
we note that complainant previously raised these matters on appeal.
However, 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), 9-17 (November
9, 1999). As such, we decline to address these arguments.
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. 0120071019 remains the
Commission's final 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 (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
____8-31-07______________
Date
2
0520070785
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C. 20036
3
0520070785