Larissa E.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sep 18, 2019

2019003310 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 18, 2019)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Larissa E.,1
Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Pacific Area),
Agency.

Request No. 2019003310

Appeal No. 2019001650

Agency No. 1F901019518

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Larissa E. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No.
2019001650 (Mar. 21, 2019). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its
discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29
C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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(c).

In the underlying complaint, Complainant, a Handler Assistant at the Agency's Processing and
Distribution Center in Los Angeles, California, alleged that the Agency discriminated against her
based on sex (female) and reprisal (prior EEO activity) when: (1) on July 26, 2018, she had to wait
for medical attention after she experienced an on-the-job injury; and (2) on September 1, 2018, her
Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) paperwork was submitted late which
delayed her continuation of pay.

1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name
when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website.
2019003310

2
Our previous decision affirmed the Agency’s final decision dismissing the complaint pursuant to
29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim. Specifically, we found that Complainant
failed to allege facts, which if proven true, would establish that she suffered harm or loss with
respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy. We also
found that the EEO process was not the proper forum for Complainant to raise matters concerning
her OWCP claims and entitlement to continuation of pay. Such claims must be raised within the
OWCP process. See Wills v. Dep’t of Def., EEOC Request No. 05970596 (July 30, 1998) (holding
the Commission has held that an employee cannot use the EEO complaint process to lodge a
collateral attack on another adjudicatory proceeding).
In her reconsideration request, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the appellate
decision and reiterates many arguments previously made on appeal. The Commission emphasizes
that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. Equal Employment Opportunity
Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), Chap. 9 § VI.A (Aug. 5, 2015);
see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a
reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the appellate decision involved a
clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or will have a substantial impact on the
policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here.

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(c), and it is the decision of the Commission to
DENY the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2019001650 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 (Z0815)

If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request
permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs.
Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the
court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or
appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole
discretion to grant or deny these types of requests.
2019003310

3
Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled
Complainant’s Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

September 18, 2019
Date