01a03283
07-19-2000
Sap U. Bobbi, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Sap U. Bobbi v. United States Postal Service
01A03283
July 19, 2000
Sap U. Bobbi, )
Complainant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01A03283
) Agency No. 1C-191-0180-99
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
____________________________________)
DECISION
Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was
properly dismissed pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to
be codified and hereinafter referred to as EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �
1614.107(a)(2)), for untimely EEO contact.<1> We find that no persuasive
arguments or evidence have been presented to warrant an extension of the
time limit for initiating EEO contact.<2> Complainant alleged that he
was discriminated against based on national origin (Indian), age (DOB:
9/16/52), and physical disability (eyesight) when: (1) on June 7, 1999, he
was called blind by an unspecified individual; and (2) on June 26, 1999,
he was suspended and, at the end of August 1999, he was informed that he
would not be rehired. Complainant did not initiate contact with an EEO
counselor until September 9, 1999. Contrary to complainant's assertion
otherwise, the record indicates that he was never suspended. On June 26,
1999, management officials determined that he took two items of mail.
Complainant was informed that he was terminated, his identification badge
was confiscated, and he was escorted from the building. The agency issued
a Notification of Personnel Action (SF-50) that officially terminated
complainant, effective June 30, 1999. Although complaint, in response
to an inquiry, was informed in August 1999 that he would not be rehired,
the alleged discriminatory event occurred on June 30, 1999. Accordingly,
the agency's final decision dismissing the complaint is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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 64
Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred
to as 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 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).
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)
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:
07-19-00 ________________________________
Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations
1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal
sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply to all
federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative
process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations
found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.
2Complainant did not maintain that he was unaware of the time limit for
contacting an EEO counselor. We note, however, that the record contains
an affidavit from a management official indicating that EEO posters
with appropriate time frames are posted at complainant's work site.
Also, the record contains a statement from complainant, dated December
5, 1998, indicating that he had attended an orientation session during
which the EEO process and the 45-day time frame were discussed.