0520120604
02-20-2013
Toni A. Coleman-Scruggs, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Great Lakes Area), Agency.
Toni A. Coleman-Scruggs,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Great Lakes Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120604
Appeal No. 0120100826
Hearing No. 470-2009-00098X
Agency No. 4J-460-0124-08
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Toni A. Coleman-Scruggs v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120100826 (July 25, 2012). 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).
On October 30, 2008, Complainant filed an EEO complaint in which she alleged that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African American), sex (female), disability, age (43 years old), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when, on April 16, 2008, through October 8, 2008:
1. She was denied a reasonable accommodation meeting;
2. She was denied advanced sick leave;
3. She was verbally harassed and intimidated in person and via email;
4. Her Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) rights were violated;
5. She was denied access to her office;
6. Her expense report was denied;
7. She was subjected to racist remarks by the Manager;
8. She was denied a representative after she requested one during a meeting with her manager on or about July 22, 2008;
9. She was mandated to work six days without a day off; and
10. She was bypassed for an end-of-year achievement award.
In its final decision, the Agency found that Complainant failed to prove that she was subjected to unlawful discrimination or harassment. Our previous decision affirmed the Agency's final decision based on our finding that, although the Manager's actions were sometimes insensitive with regard to Complainant's need for time to cope with her daughter's death, Complainant did not present any evidence that demonstrated that the Manager's actions were based on her protected bases or that management's non-discriminatory reasons were pretext for discrimination. Further, our previous decision concluded that Complainant failed to prove harassment because the alleged incidents were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile work environment. Finally, the Commission found that Complainant failed to show that she was denied a reasonable accommodation for her disability because she failed to respond to the Agency's request for medical documentation.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant essentially reiterates contentions and arguments made during the investigation and on appeal. We note that a "request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission." Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here.
Consequently, 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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120100826 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
February 20, 2013
Date
2
0520120604
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120604