Ayesha W.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jul 11, 2018

0520180268 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 11, 2018)

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

Ayesha W.,1
Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.

Request No. 0520180268

Appeal No. 0120162707

Hearing No. 430-2015-00163X

Agency No. 4K-280-0131-14

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Ayesha W. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No.
0120162707 (Jan. 31, 2018). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its
discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29
C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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).

On October 17, 2014, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging that she was subjected
to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the bases of race (African-American),
national origin (African, Native American), sex (female), and color (black, darker skin tone)
when:

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.
0520180268

2
1. From June 9 through 11, 2014 and July 1 through 3, 2014, her requests for travel pay
were denied;
2. On July 20, 2014, she had to work 2.5 hours on a Sunday washing Postal vehicles;
3. On July 12, 2014, after applying for a Postal Support Employee Clerk position in
Dover, North Carolina, she was told the position was not available;
4. On July 18, 2014, she was instructed to drive a postal truck even though she never
received training;
5. On August 12, 2014, she was instructed on how to handle circulars;
6. On July 28, 2014, and September 2, 2014, she was told to speed up her route;
7. On September 18, 2014, she was subjected to a pre-disciplinary interview;
8. Since September 6, 2014, she has not been permitted to work; and,
9. On October 9, 2014, she was issued a Separation During Probation Notice for Failure
to Observe Safety Rules and Regulations.

Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ). The AJ assigned to the matter granted the Agency’s motion for summary judgment,
and issued a decision finding that Complainant had not been subjected to discrimination or a
hostile work environment as alleged. The Agency subsequently issued a final order fully
implementing the AJ’s decision.

Complainant appealed and, in Ayesha W. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120162707
(Jan. 31, 2018), the Commission affirmed the final order. The Commission found that the
alleged incidents were insufficiently severe or pervasive to establish a hostile work environment
and that Complainant failed to show that the Agency’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for
its actions were pretext for unlawful discrimination.

In her request for reconsideration, Complainant argues that the Commission erred in finding that
she failed to show that her termination was discriminatory. Complainant contends that she
demonstrated that the Agency was inconsistent and unfair in its punishments under Agency
policy. The Commission emphasizes 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), at 9-18 (Aug. 5, 2015); see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request
No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). 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. Complainant has not presented any evidence
establishing that the Commission erred in finding that the AJ properly granted summary
judgment in this matter. Moreover, the Commission finds that Complainant has not presented
any evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission’s finding that she failed to show that
she was subjected to discrimination.

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. 0120162707 remains the
0520180268

3
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 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

July 11, 2018
Date