05A30964
08-28-2003
Keith C. Pruett, Complainant, v. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary, Department of Defense, Agency.
Keith C. Pruett v. Department of Defense
05A30964
08-28-03
.
Keith C. Pruett,
Complainant,
v.
Donald Rumsfeld,
Secretary,
Department of Defense,
Agency.
Request No. 05A30964
Appeal No. 01A21629
Agency No. JQ-00-039
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
On July 7, 2003, Keith C. Pruett (complainant) timely initiated a request
to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission)
to reconsider the decision in Keith C. Pruett v. Department of Defense,
EEOC Appeal No. 01A21629 (May 29, 2003). 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).
In Complaint JQ-00-039, complainant maintained, in pertinent part,
that he was discriminated against because of his race (Caucasian), sex
and previous EEO activity when, on December 27, 1996, he was denied a
detail to the position of Distribution Facilities Specialist, GS-2030-09.
The agency issued a decision finding no discrimination and complainant
filed an appeal to the Commission. On May 29, 2003, the Commission
issued the previous decision, which affirmed the agency's finding
of no discrimination. The previous decision noted that there was no
evidence that anyone was ever detailed into the position in question.
Subsequently, a Black female employee was awarded the vacant position
after a competitive bid. Complainant did not apply for the vacancy.
In his request for reconsideration, complainant raises two contentions.
First, he reiterates his assertion that he did not receive a copy of the
investigation file. Second, he maintains that the allegation at issue
in this case should be addressed as part of a claim that was remanded
for investigation in January 2003. According to the record, in Pruett
v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 01A01375 (January 3, 2003),
the Commission affirmed the finding of an Administrative Judge that
complainant's class complaint should be dismissed. Complainant had
maintained that the agency discriminated against him and a class of
persons on the bases of race (Caucasian), sex (male) and previous EEO
activity when the agency selected Black employees for training, details,
and promotions while disciplining Caucasian employees, and encouraging
them to resign or take early retirement. Upon affirming the dismissal
of the class complaint, the Commission, in EEOC Appeal 01A01375, remanded
complainant's individual claim for processing.
After a review of 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. The decision in EEOC
Appeal No. 01A21629 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.
In this regard, we note that, as indicated in the previous decision,
the record contains evidence that complainant's attorney received a copy
of the investigative file on June 21, 2000. There being no evidence
that complainant was no longer being represented by the attorney, we
find that reconsideration is not warranted. Likewise, we do not find
that the previous decision erred by not remanding the allegation at
issue herein for consideration with the claim that was remanded in EEOC
Appeal No. 01A21375 (January 3, 2003). Complainant's allegation that, on
December 27, 1996, he was denied a detail to the position of Distribution
Facilities Specialist has already been investigated by the agency.
Furthermore, complainant's right to a hearing on this issue has already
been waived because neither he nor his attorney requested such a hearing.
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
___08-28-03_______________
Date