Elbert Hicks, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 24, 2000
01a02150 (E.E.O.C. May. 24, 2000)

01a02150

05-24-2000

Elbert Hicks, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Elbert Hicks, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01A02150

William J. Henderson, ) Agency No. 4-K-210-0173-99

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DECISION

On January 12, 2000, complainant filed a timely appeal with this

Commission from an agency decision dated January 5, 2000, pertaining

to his complaint of unlawful employment discrimination in violation of

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e

et seq., the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as

amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq., and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq.<1> In his complaint,

complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination on the bases

of race (Black), sex (male), age (51), physical disability (back injury),

and in retaliation for prior EEO activity when:

A June 29, 1999 letter sent by complainant to the Manager of Human

Resources, in which complainant applied for restoration to duty, has

gone unanswered.

The agency dismissed complainant's complaint pursuant to the regulation

set forth at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be codified and

hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a)(1)), for stating the

same claim that has been decided by or is pending before the agency or the

Commission. Specifically, the agency stated that the present complaint

is like or related and arises from the same transaction as the matter

raised in Agency Case No. 1-K-211-0122-98, for which the agency issued

a decision on November 18, 1998, and from which complainant appealed

to the Commission (EEOC Appeal No. 01991525). In addition, the agency

dismissed complainant's complaint pursuant to the regulation set forth

at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(7)), for failure to cooperate.

Specifically, the agency stated that it asked complainant to produce

a copy of the cited June 29, 1999 letter and claimed that complainant

failed to provide the requested letter.

The record reveals that complainant previously filed an EEO complaint

on September 23, 1998, claiming that he was discriminated against when

among other things, the agency failed to address complainant's requests

to be restored to duty in his local area. In both the 1998 complaint and

in the present complaint, complainant requested restoration to his local

community area of Ceiba, Puerto Rico. In Agency Case No. 1-K-211-0122-98,

the agency issued a final decision dismissing the issue of complainant's

restoration request on the grounds that it was untimely raised before

an EEO Counselor and in the alternative that it stated the same issue

previously decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) in

a September 30, 1999 decision ( MSPB Docket No. PH-0353-98-0439-I-1).

The Commission affirmed the agency's dismissal of complainant's complaint

in EEOC Appeal No. 01991525 (January 10, 2000). We find that the present

complaint involves the same matters previously decided by both the agency

and the Commission.

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss complainant's complaint

was proper and is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0300)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish 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.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, MUST BE FILED

WITH THE OFFICE OF FEDERAL OPERATIONS (OFO) WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS of receipt of this decision or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS OF

RECEIPT OF ANOTHER PARTY'S TIMELY REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION. See 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred

to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405); Equal Employment Opportunity Management

Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999).

All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of

Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box

19848, Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the

request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by

mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.

See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604). The request or opposition must

also include proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)

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. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

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:

May 24, 2000

____________________________

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

_______________ __________________________

Date 1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's

federal sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations

apply to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in

the administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply

the revised regulations found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where

applicable, in deciding the present appeal. The regulations, as amended,

may also be found at the Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.