0520120632
03-08-2013
Lisa A. Irby, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.
Lisa A. Irby,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southeast Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120632
Appeal No. 0120110458
Agency No. 1H-381-0026-10
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Lisa A. Irby v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110458 (August 17, 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).
Our previous decision affirmed the Agency's final decision, which dismissed Complainant's complaint as moot and found, alternatively, that the Agency did not discriminate against Complainant on the bases of sex (female) and reprisal for prior EEO activity when it issued her a 14-day suspension on April 9, 2010. The Agency found that it rescinded the suspension as a result of a June 8, 2010, grievance settlement, that the agreement eliminated the effects of the alleged discriminatory action, and that there was no reasonable expectation that the discrimination was likely to recur. In our previous decision, we noted that the Agency issued the suspension because Complainant failed to park a tow motor and sort mail after being instructed to do so. We found that Complainant's complaint was moot and that, even if it were not moot, the Agency did not discriminate against Complainant when it issued the suspension. In that regard, we concluded that the Agency articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the suspension and that Complainant failed to show that the reason was pretextual.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant argues that the grievance settlement did not state that the alleged discrimination had no effect or was eliminated. She asserts that the Agency "did not cite the wage loss nor discriminator[y] behavior, which rises above this grievance." In addition, Complainant argues that her supervisor subjected her to harassment and "ongoing adverse action over the years." She attaches August and October 2010 statements alleging harassment and several handwritten statements from individuals stating that they observed Complainant on the South Dock on July 23, 2010.
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) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here.
Complainant seems to argue that her complaint is not moot because she sustained a wage loss, but there is no evidence that the rescinded suspension in fact resulted in a wage loss. Moreover, the previous decision expressly found that, even if the complaint were not moot, the Agency did not discriminate against Complainant when it issued the suspension. Complainant's references to matters occurring in July, August, and October 2010 do not show that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of sex and reprisal when it issued the April 9, 2010, suspension. Complainant has not demonstrated that the previous decision clearly erred in finding that her complaint was moot and that she failed to prove her claim of discrimination.
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. 0120110458 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 8, 2013
Date
2
0520120632
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120632