Salvatore K.,1 Complainant,v.Elaine L. Chao, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Feb 28, 2017

0520170079 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 28, 2017)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Salvatore K.,1
Complainant,

v.

Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary,
Department of Transportation,
Agency.

Request No. 0520170079

Appeal No. 0120162079

Agency Nos. DOT-OST-12-003,
2012-24544-NHTSA-02

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No.
0120162079 (October 19, 2016). 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(c).

Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement on February 5, 2016.
Complainant subsequently claimed that the Agency breached the settlement agreement by
failing to “show the math for the computation of its payments…, leaving Complainant and his
counsel unable to determine if they have paid all that is required by the parties’ February 5,
2016, Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release.” Complainant also claimed that the
Agency breached the settlement agreement by using a non-standard form of signature for
Complainant’s corrected Performance Appraisal Ratings, “making them to appear less than
genuine and authentic.”

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.
0520170079

2
On appeal, Complainant raised these claims of breach and petitioned for enforcement of the
settlement agreement. In EEOC Appeal No. 0120162079, we rejected Complainant’s
contentions that the Agency breached the settlement agreement. We found that the settlement
agreement did not require a summary of the calculations or specify the method by which the
Agency determined its calculations. We noted that the Agency stated that the back pay
amounts were reflected on the Period 7 and Period 10 pay stubs and that, consistent with
paragraph 13 of the settlement agreement, the Agency provided Complainant with access to his
Employee Express account. We also noted that Complainant did not identify any payments he
did not receive. We further found that the settlement agreement did not dictate the specific
format for the performance agreement or the signatures and thus the Agency did not breach
this portion of the settlement agreement.

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant merely reiterates contentions that were
considered in the previous decision. We note that a “request for reconsideration is not a
second appeal to the Commission.” E.g., 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. (Aug. 5, 2015). 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.

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. 0120162079 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 (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
0520170079

3
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

February 28, 2017
Date