[Redacted], Emilia Z., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Field Areas and Regions), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 14, 2023

Appeal No. 2021003507 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 14, 2023)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Emilia Z.,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Field Areas and Regions), Agency. Request No. 2022004915 Appeal No. 2021003507 Agency No. 4F-913-0077-20 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Emilia Z. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 2021003507 (May 11, 2022). 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). Complainant, a Lead Clerk at the Agency's Verdugo Viejo Office in Glendale, California, filed a formal EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her and subjected her to a hostile work environment on the bases of national origin (Asian) and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: 1. Since April 13, 2020 and continuing. Manager Customer Services (MCS) harassed her about her performance and conduct; 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. 2022004915 2 2. In May 2020 and continuing, MCS encouraged other employees to gang up against her and encouraged them to submit false statements about her; 3. Since April 2020, another clerk was provided with more overtime than she was; 4. On July 3, 2020, she was put on Emergency Placement in an Off-Duty Status without Pay; 5. On July 12, 2020, she was issued a Letter of Warning; 6. On July 17, 2020, she was issued a Notice of 14-Day Suspension; 7. On July 25, 2020, she was put on Emergency Placement in an Off-Duty Status; 8. On July 6, 2020, management refused to accept her CA-1 form (Federal Employee's Notice of Traumatic Injury) and accused her of forging a signature on the document; 9. On or about August 26, 2020, she was threatened with removal for filing an injury claim; 10. On July 21, 2020, she was put on Emergency Placement in an Off-Duty Status; and 11. On September 16, 2020, she was issued a Notice of Removal. Following an investigation, the Agency issued a final decision finding that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination or reprisal as alleged. In the appellate decision, the Commission affirmed the final decision. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the previous decision and largely reiterates arguments previously made on appeal. Among her arguments, Complainant renews her contention that the Agency’s articulated reasons for its actions have no merit and are pretextual. We have reviewed the various arguments raised by Complainant in the instant request for reconsideration. However, we can find no basis to disturb the Commission's prior decision. Complainant presents arguments which were previously raised and considered or could have been raised during the original 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. Thus, we conclude that Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission's decision. 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. 2021003507 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 2022004915 3 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. 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 March 14, 2023 Date