05A20237
03-04-2002
Jesse Starcher, Jr., Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.
Jesse Starcher, Jr. v. United States Postal Service
05A20237
3/4/02
.
Jesse Starcher, Jr.,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southeast Area),
Agency.
Request No. 05A20237
Appeal No. 01993935
Agency Nos. 4H-335-1208-96, 4H-335-0054-98
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Jesse
Starcher, Jr. v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01993935
(11/21/01). 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).
Complainant filed two formal complaints alleging discrimination on the
bases of religion (Baptist), national origin (American Indian), age
(DOB; 10/27/44), disability (stress), and reprisal (prior EEO activity),
when: (1) he was harassed by management for the second time concerning
his casing and carrying of Delivery Point Sequence (DPS) mail; and (2)
on October 9, 1997, he discovered that management retained a Notice of
Suspension in his file which should have been expunged.
The prior decision affirmed the agency's final decision that found no
discrimination. Specifically, the prior decision determined complainant
submitted insufficient evidence that the conduct alleged rose to the
level of prohibited harassment, or that the harassment was based on a
discriminatory motive. The prior decision also found complainant's second
complaint represented a collateral attack on the negotiated grievance
process, in light of complainant's allegation that the agency failed to
remove the Notice of Suspension pursuant to a grievance settlement.
In his request for reconsideration, complainant claims that the
investigation of his complaint was one-sided and he did not receive
an impartial review of his claims. After a review of the 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. Complainant failed to establish that the prior decision
involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material law or fact.
Despite his arguments to the contrary, complainant's documentary and
testimonial evidence submitted in support his claims was considered
in the prior decision. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01993935
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
3/4/02
Date