Richard Salaiz, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 29, 2005
01a40946 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 29, 2005)

01a40946

11-29-2005

Richard Salaiz, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Richard Salaiz v. United States Postal Service

01A40946

November 29, 2005

.

Richard Salaiz,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A40946

Agency No. 4G-780-0121-01

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's

decision dated September 15, 2003, dismissing his complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. In his

complaint, complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination

on the bases of national origin (Hispanic) and sex (male) and reprisal

when he was not interviewed for the Postmaster position in La Feria,

TX. In his complainant, he stated he sent in his application but it was

not received by the agency.

Initially, the agency dismissed the matter for failure to state a claim,

arguing that complainant had not applied for the position. However, in

EEOC Appeal No. 01A13256 (January 23, 2003), the Commission considered

complainant's arguments regarding his application and found that the

complaint stated a claim and remanded the matter. In the meantime,

complainant filed another complaint, Agency No. 4-G-780-0005-01 wherein

he alleged that he was unofficially notified that he was selected for

the La Feria, TX position, but that the position was later cancelled and

re-posted. Agency No. 4-G-780-0005-01 was consolidated with three other

complaints and a hearing was held. Thereafter an EEOC Administrative

Judge (AJ) issued a decision finding no discrimination and specifically

addressed complainant's issues with the La Feria, TX position. The agency

adopted the AJ's decision as its final decision and Complainant appealed

to the Commission. In EEOC Appeal No. 01A34225 (June 22, 2004), the

Commission affirmed the finding of no discrimination. Complainant did

not request reconsideration.

As to the matter at hand, the agency dismissed complainant's complaint

because it was identical to that in �4-G-780-0332-00" (which dealt with a

non-selection in Sebastian, TX). It should be noted that 4-G-780-0332-00

is one of the cases consolidated with 4-G-780-0005-01 for which a hearing

was held. While it is clear that the instant complaint is not identical

to the one identified in the agency's final agency decision, as pointed

out by complainant in his appeal, it is clear that the matters have been

addressed by an EEOC AJ and that the Commission has previously addressed

the issue in Appeal No. 01A34225. As such, the agency's dismissal of the

instant complaint for being identical to another complaint is affirmed.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614. 107 (a)(1).

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0701)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish 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.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed

with the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar

days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of

receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for

29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests

and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the

request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by

mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include

proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0900)

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. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

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

November 29, 2005

__________________

Date