0520130163
05-14-2013
Nancy Davis, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.
Nancy Davis,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southeast Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520130163
Appeal No. 0120110662
Hearing No. 410-2010-00016X
Agency No. 4H300008709
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Nancy Davis v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110662 (October 25, 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).
Although Complainant, who provided no statement on appeal, argued in her reconsideration request that the Agency failed to present witnesses or testimony at the hearing to establish that there was a legitimate reason for her placement on emergency off duty status and her subsequent removal, the previous decision found no error with regard to the Administrative Judge's decision to limit the hearing to Complainant's case-in-chief. The record clearly supported a determination that the Agency provided a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for its actions, i.e., on December 26, 2008, Complainant entered her office and became disruptive and hostile. Several supervisors witnessed Complainant's outburst. She was instructed to go home, but she refused. The police were subsequently called and Complainant was escorted off the premises. She was placed in an Emergency Off-Duty Status after the incident until January 6, 2008. After conducting an investigative interview with Complainant, management issued her a Notice of Removal for improper conduct based on the December 26, 2008 incident. The previous decision found no evidence of pretext.
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. 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. 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. Complainant has not put forth any arguments which the Commission finds to be material to the outcome of the underlying decision, or that were not previously considered in rendering the underlying decision, we find no evidence that Complainant has met the criteria for reconsideration. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120110662 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
___5/14/13_______________
Date
2
0520130163
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013