Aline A.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

May 26, 2016

0520160211 (E.E.O.C. May. 26, 2016)

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

Aline A.,1
Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.

Request No. 0520160211

Appeal No. 0120160130

Agency No. 4F-920-0013-15

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No.
0120160130 (January 13, 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 claimed that the Agency breached the settlement agreement that the parties
entered into on January 16, 2015, when it did not keep her at North Park Station and instead
assigned her to the San Bernardino Uptown Station. The relevant provision of the settlement
agreement states that “Upon successful bidding of Route 0532 Counselee [Complainant’s
name] will be assigned to North Park Station as indicated by form 50.” In its final decision,
the Agency determined that it did not breach the settlement agreement. The Agency stated that
the successful bidder for the route was not Complainant, but rather another employee. The
Agency further stated that Complainant was required to state a preference which resulted in her
being awarded a job at the Agency’s Uptown facility. On appeal, the Commission found that
the Agency properly determined that it had not breached the settlement agreement. Further,
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.

0520160211

2
we stated that to the extent Complainant asserts that she was awarded a route that placed her at
the Uptown facility and that this was due to retaliation and/or discrimination, Complainant
should contact an EEO Counselor if she wishes to pursue this matter through the EEO process.

In her request to reconsider, Complainant contends that the previous decision should be
reversed. Complainant argues that she did not bid on Route 0532 as that route is at the
Uptown facility and she wanted to work at the North Park Office. Complainant also claims
that the T-6 routes 0501, 0502, 0504 and 0505 that she was assigned to at the Uptown facility
had not been filled for five years and were given to her after she signed the settlement
agreement in order to keep her at the Uptown facility.

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 settlement agreement clearly stated that upon successful
bidding of Route 0532 Complainant would be assigned to North Park Station. Complainant
should not have agreed to such language being inserted in the settlement agreement had she not
intended to be bound by such language. As we stated in our prior decision, to the extent
Complainant asserts that she was awarded a route that placed her at the Uptown facility and
that this was due to retaliation and/or discrimination, Complainant should contact an EEO
Counselor if she wishes to pursue this matter through the EEO process. The decision in EEOC
Appeal No. 0120160130 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
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

0520160211

3
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

May 26, 2016
Date