0520100181
06-07-2010
Cecelia A. Fields, Complainant, v. Paul F. Prouty, Acting Administrator, General Services Administration, Agency.
Cecelia A. Fields,
Complainant,
v.
Paul F. Prouty,
Acting Administrator,
General Services Administration,
Agency.
Request No. 0520100181
Appeal No. 0120073204
Hearing No. 110-2004-00257X
Agency No. GSAR04-2003001
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Cecelia
A. Fields v. General Services Administration, EEOC Appeal No. 0120073204
(November 19, 2009). 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 its appellate decision, the Commission affirmed the final agency
order fully implementing the decision of the Administrative Judge (AJ).
Following a hearing, the AJ found that complainant had not established, by
preponderant evidence, that the agency had subjected her to discriminatory
harassment and termination.1
In her request for reconsideration, complainant reiterates arguments
raised and rejected below, including whether she established a prima
facie case. Complainant also revisits her status as a contractor
versus an employee, arguing that the AJ did not refer to the appropriate
comparators in finding no discrimination.
We note that a request for reconsideration is not a second form
of appeal. E.g., Lopez v. Department of Agriculture, EEOC Request
No. 0520070736 (August 20, 2007). The arguments raised by complainant
do not identify a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact
or law in the appellate decision, nor a means by which the appellate
decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices,
or operations of the agency.
Therefore, after reconsidering 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. 0120073204 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 (P0408)
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 (Z1008)
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
June 7, 2010
Date
1 In an earlier appeal, the Commission remanded the claims herein for
processing, having determined that complainant, a contractor, met the
requisites to be considered an employee of the agency for purposes of
processing her EEO complaint. Cecelia A. Fields v. General Services
Administration, EEOC Appeal No. 01A51814 (April 14, 2006).
??
??
??
??
2
0520100181
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520100181