0520110445
10-27-2011
Paul M. Rees, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Western Area), Agency.
Paul M. Rees,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Western Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520110445
Appeal No. 0120110942
Agency No. 4E-500-0072-10
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Paul
M. Rees v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110942 (April
26, 2011). 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).
In our previous decision, the Commission affirmed the dismissal
of Complainant’s complaint on the basis that it failed to state a
claim. We noted that Complainant’s claim regarding denial of union
representation should be brought within the grievance process.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates his claim that
the Agency retaliated against him by bringing him into an office with a
union steward. Upon review, we find that our previous decision properly
affirmed the Agency’s dismissal on the basis that Complainant’s
complaint failed to state a claim.
We remind Complainant that a request for reconsideration is not a
second form of appeal. See Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request
No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007); EEO Management Directive for Part 1614
(EEO MD-110), Chap. 9, §VII.A. (Nov. 9, 1999). Complainant’s request
does not establish clear error of material fact of law in our previous
decision.
Therefore, after reconsidering 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. 0120110942 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
October 27, 2011
Date