Naumi A. Hafis, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionOct 6, 2003
05A31102 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 6, 2003)

05A31102

10-06-2003

Naumi A. Hafis, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Naumi A. Hafis v. United States Postal Service

05A31102

10-06-03

.

Naumi A. Hafis,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Request No. 05A31102

Appeal No. 01A32793

Agency No. 4D-230-0190-01

Hearing No. 120-A3-00007X

DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Naumi A. Hafis (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider

the decision in Naumi A. Hafis v. United States Postal Service, EEOC

Appeal No. 01A32793 (July 10, 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).

Complainant filed an EEO complaint claiming that she had been

discriminated against on the bases of race (African American), national

origin (African American), sex (female), age (DOB: 11/5/1960), and

reprisal for prior EEO activity when: 1) in November 2000, she was

denied a lateral detail assignment to Bon Air Station; 2) in March 2001,

she was denied a lateral assignment to the Pocoshock Creek Branch; 3)

in January 2001, she was denied a lateral relief / swing assignment;

4) in June 2001, she was denied the opportunity to be a mentor; and 5)

in June 2001, she was denied the opportunity to apply for the position

of Manager, Customer Services, Southside Station. After complainant was

issued the report of investigation, she requested a hearing before an

EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ determined that the case was

appropriate for a decision without a hearing, and issued a decision

finding that the complainant had not been discriminated against.

In her March 11, 2003 summary judgment decision, the AJ found that there

were no material facts in genuine dispute and issued a decision on the

record. The AJ found that issues 1, 2, 3, and 4 were untimely raised

with an EEO Counselor and should be dismissed. She also found that

complainant had presented no evidence establishing prima facie cases on

any of her raised bases, and that the agency had articulated legitimate,

nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions which complainant failed to

show were pretext for discrimination. The agency issued a final order

which implemented the AJ's decision. The previous decision affirmed

the agency's implementation of the AJ's decision.

In her request for reconsideration, complainant submitted an argument

in which she attempted to show that the AJ's decision was incorrectly

decided, and which supported her claim that she had been discriminated

against and that her claims constituted a continuing violation.

The agency objected to complainant's request for reconsideration on

the grounds that she had not met the criteria for the granting of

reconsideration.

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 record does not

contain evidence which would support a finding of discrimination.

The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01A32793 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.

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

___10-06-03_______________

Date