Charlie O.,1 Complainant,v.Eric K. Fanning, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.Download PDFEqual Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 17, 20160520160493 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 17, 2016) Copy Citation U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Charlie O.,1 Complainant, v. Eric K. Fanning, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency. Request No. 0520160493 Appeal No. 0120161731 Agency No. ARBELVOIR116JAN00832 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120161731 (July 19, 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). In his underlying complaint, Complainant alleged that the Agency subjected him to unlawful race and reprisal discrimination when he was terminated from employment on October 27, 2015. The Agency dismissed the complaint, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2), for untimely EEO counselor contact. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal. Specifically, we found that although Complainant sent an email regarding his termination to the PEO Soldier Chief, Personnel/Victim Advocate on November 4, 2015, this email did not exhibit intent to initiate the EEO process. Accordingly, we found that Complainant did not initiate EEO Counselor contact until January 19, 2016, which was beyond the 45-day time limit. 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. 0520160493 2 In his request for reconsideration, Complainant largely reiterates arguments made and fully considered on appeal. Therefore, 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. 0120161731 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 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 November 17, 2016 Date U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Alonso T.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency. Request No. 0520160499 Appeal No. 0120161893 Agency No. 4G-320-0076-16 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120161893 (July 19, 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). In his underlying complaint, Complainant claimed that he was discriminated against on the bases of his race (African-American), disability (unspecified), and in reprisal for his prior EEO activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. when he learned of the Pittman and Glover class action settlement and was never contacted by the Agency to be included in the class action. In its final decision, the Agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2) on the grounds that Complainant failed to file the complaint in a 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. 0520160499 2 timely manner. The Agency stated that Complainant had been removed from his position with the Agency in February 1981. Complainant initiated EEO counseling in March 2016. The Agency reasoned that Complainant’s EEO contact was many years after Complainant’s removal. The Agency further noted that as Complainant was removed in 1981, he was not an employee during the time frames considered in the Pittman and Glover class actions. On appeal, the Commission addressed Complainant’s arguments and found that the Agency properly dismissed the complaint. We observed that Complainant had filed an EEO complaint concerning his removal in February 1981. Subsequent to an Agency determination of no discrimination, Complainant filed an appeal with the Commission. In EEOC Appeal No. 01840061 (November 13, 1984), the Commission dismissed the appeal because it was filed in an untimely manner. We observed in our previous decision that Complainant was provided with an opportunity to request reconsideration of our decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0119840061 and failed to do so. We invoked the doctrine of laches due to Complainant’s failure to diligently pursue his claim. In his request to reconsider, Complainant contends that our prior decision should be reversed because given the settlement of the Glover and Pittman cases, he should receive a hearing. 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. 0120161893 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 0520160499 3 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 November 17, 2016 Date Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation
