05990443
06-06-2001
Carolyn S. Meeks, Complainant, v. Craven H. Crowell, Jr., Chairman, Tennessee Valley Authority, Agency.
Carolyn S. Meeks v. Tennessee Valley Authority
05990443
June 6, 2001
.
Carolyn S. Meeks,
Complainant,
v.
Craven H. Crowell, Jr.,
Chairman,
Tennessee Valley Authority,
Agency.
Request No. 05990443
Appeal No. 01970002
Agency No. 0511-94064
Hearing No. 250-94-8268X
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Carolyn
S. Meeks v. Tennessee Valley Authority, EEOC Appeal No. 01970002
(January 29, 1999). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may,
in its discretion, 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).
Complainant is employed by the agency as a Custodian, SF-1. She filed
a complaint on March 4, 1994 alleging that she was subject to reprisal
(prior EEO activity) when on March 4, 1994, she was given an unfavorable
performance rating and physical disability (back injury and kidney
disease) when on or about March 15, 1994, she was purportedly forced to
violate her restrictions. In a recommended decision dated July 22, 1996,
an Administrative Judge (AJ) of the EEOC found that complainant failed to
establish a prima facie case of reprisal because she did not identify any
similarly situated individuals who were treated more favorably than her.
The AJ also found that complainant failed to establish a prima facie
case of disability discrimination because she did not fall within the
definition of an individual with a disability. Specifically, the AJ
held that none of complainants medical conditions affected any of her
major life activities including work.
In a final agency decision dated September 3, 1996, the agency adopted
the recommended finding of no discrimination issued by the AJ. In its
previous decision, the Commission affirmed the final agency decision.
In her request for reconsideration, complainant contends that she was
isolated from the other employees and that the record contained ample
evidence of her disability. In this regard, complainant notes that
both her personal physician and the agency's physician placed her on
long term back injury restrictions. Basically, the arguments raised
by complainant on appeal are a reiteration of arguments made earlier
in the complaint process which were properly addressed by the AJ in
his recommended decision. As such, we note that the AJ found that
complainant's isolation was self imposed or driven by the agency's effort
to place her in a work location which was consistent with her medical
restrictions. The AJ also found that although work restrictions were
imposed on complainant, none of those restrictions were violated by the
agency and none of complainant's disabilities had a significant impact
on any of her major life activities.
After a review of the complainant's request for reconsideration, 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. 01970002 remains the Commission's final decision.
There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of
the Commission on this request for reconsideration.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)
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 (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:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
June 6, 2001
__________________
Date