0520130397
09-27-2013
Sherita L. Douglas, Complainant, v. Ray H. LaHood, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.
Sherita L. Douglas,
Complainant,
v.
Ray H. LaHood,
Secretary,
Department of Transportation,
Agency.
Request No. 0520130397
Appeal No. 0120114115
Agency No. 2011-23652-FAA-03
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Sherita L. Douglas v. Department of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 0120114115 (March 20, 2013). 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 the appellate decision, Complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination based on reprisal when she was not selected for a position. A final agency decision (FAD) was issued that found Complainant failed to demonstrate that she was subjected to discrimination. The previous decision affirmed the Agency's finding.
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION CONTENTIONS
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant contends that a coworker that had also filed an EEO complaint regarding this same matter recently prevailed in her case before an EEOC Administrative Judge. She indicates that the coworker was able to show that the RMO discriminated against her. According to Complainant, she discovered many details about the selection process in her case by participating as a witness in the coworker's case. Complainant asks that her case be reconsidered because the Agency failed to conduct a thorough and complete investigation. Complainant also argues that the Agency failed to conduct even a rudimentary inquiry into the explanations provided by the selecting officials.
The Agency did not provide a response.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. We find that Complainant has not shown that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or that the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the agency. With regard to Complainant's contentions in this request, the Commission finds that the final decision was issued based on the information contained in the report of investigation. Complainant, we note, had the opportunity to request an administrative hearing. Had she requested a hearing, she would have been able to call witnesses, cross-examine the Agency's witnesses, and request documents from the Agency that would have supplemented the record. Moreover, the Administrative Judge would have been able to make credibility determinations regarding the testimony that was provided. Because there was no hearing in this case, the previous decision had to make determinations based on the record before it. We find no persuasive evidence that the previous decision erred. Accordingly, the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120114115 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
___9/27/13_______________
Date
2
0520130397
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
3
0520130397