Garrett M.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Western Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sep 18, 2019

2019003611 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 18, 2019)

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

Garrett M.,1
Complainant,

v.

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

Request No. 2019003611

Appeal No. 2019001659

Hearing No. 550-2016-00317X

Agency No. 4F940002016

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Garrett M. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No.
2019001659 (Apr. 4, 2019). 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).

Complainant, a Sales and Service Distribution Associate, filed an EEO complaint in which he
alleged that the Agency subjected him to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the
bases of national origin (Korean), age (76), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity 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.
2019003611

2
1. On November 4, 2015, the Postmaster allegedly followed Complainant around the
office, yelling at him and accusing him of not closing a mail container thereby causing
the Supervisor to be injured;

2. On December 21, 2015, Complainant was allegedly forced to work all day in the mobile
postal unit by himself, and did not receive his two breaks; and

3. On unspecified dates, Complainant was allegedly required to unload heavy mail
containers from the truck.

Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ). The AJ assigned to the matter issued a summary judgment decision in favor of the
Agency finding that Complainant had not been subjected to discrimination or reprisal as alleged.
The Agency adopted the AJ’s findings and conclusions in its final order, from which Complainant
appealed. In its previous decision, the Commission found no evidence that the Postmaster or any
other management official was motivated by unlawful considerations of Complainant’s national
origin, age, or retaliation for two previous EEO complaints in connection with any of the incidents
described in the complaint.

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 (August 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. He has
not presented any argument or evidence tending to establish the existence of either reconsideration
criterion. He merely reargues his appeal on the merits, raising the same contentions that we
rejected in our previous decision.

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. 2019001659 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.
2019003611

3
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

September 18, 2019
Date