0520130006
03-20-2013
Jevonne M. Lewis, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.
Jevonne M. Lewis,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520130006
Appeal No. 0120121857
Agency No. 4K-300-0001-12
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Jevonne M. Lewis v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120121857 (August 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).
The previous decision affirmed the Agency's determination that it was not in breach of a settlement agreement signed on November 17, 2011. Complainant alleged that the Agency had not complied with a term of the settlement agreement which provided that the Agency would present her with a modified job offer by January 2, 2012. The Agency did not present a modified job offer until February 10, 2012, which Complainant did not accept. Complainant accepted the modified job offer which the Agency subsequently presented on March 8, 2012. The previous decision found that the Agency had substantially complied with the settlement agreement through its February 10, 2012, offer. The previous decision also noted that Complainant had raised new allegations in her appeal, not related to the settlement agreement, which should be raised with an EEO Counselor.
Complainant filed a request for reconsideration in which she argued that the previous decision should not have affirmed the Agency's determination that no breach occurred because of the Agency's delay in complying with the settlement agreement. She claimed that the delay in presenting her with a modified job offer contributed to pain and suffering she experienced and that she has been subjected to adverse actions in reprisal for protected EEO activity. The Agency did not file any statement or brief in opposition to Complainant's request for reconsideration.
We find that Complainant's request for reconsideration fails to show that our previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or that it would have a substantial impact on the policies, practices or operations of the Agency. Complainant's arguments in support of her request for reconsideration reiterated many of the arguments she made in support of her initial appeal. These arguments were adequately considered at that time. We note that a "request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission." E.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007); EEO Management Directive for Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), Chap. 9, �VII.A. (Nov. 9, 1999). Regarding her claims of additional discrimination based on reprisal, we advise Complainant that these claims should be raised with an EEO Counselor at the Agency in order to initiate a new complaint, if she wishes to pursue them.
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. 0120121857 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 20, 2013
Date
2
0520130006
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520130006