05990948
12-07-2000
Jasper Dodson, Complainant, v. Louis Caldera, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.
Jasper Dodson v. Department of the Army
05990948
December 7, 2000
.
Jasper Dodson,
Complainant,
v.
Louis Caldera,
Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.
Request No. 05990948
Appeal No. 01976003
Agency No. 09-587-F0110
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Jasper
Dodson v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01976003 (July 15,
1999).<1> 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 alleged that he was discriminated against on the bases of race
(African-American), Irish-American and American Indian), color (brown),
religion (Baptist), national origin (Africa, Ireland and America),
sex (male), age (38) and in reprisal (prior EEO activity) when he was
denied the opportunity to be detailed, reassigned or promoted in order
to compete for the position of GS-1170-12, Chief, Planning and Control
Branch (P&CB), Real Estate Division, and was denied the opportunity to
serve as the acting Chief P&CB.
In the appellate decision, the Commission affirmed the agency's Final
Decision (FAD) which found that complainant did not suffer an adverse
personnel action. Specifically, it found that complainant was ineligible
for a GS-12 position since he held only a GS-9 position at the time.
In addition, while complainant was placed in an �acting� capacity, he
was ineligible for a detail for similar reasons. The agency also noted
that the selectee was a 47 year old black male who identified himself
as a Baptist and who held a higher grade than complainant. Accordingly,
the agency did not find complainant similarly situated to the selectee.
Nor was any other identified comparison employee shown to be similarly
situated to complainant. With respect to the reprisal claim, the agency
found no evidence of a causal connection between the adverse action
and the prior EEO activity which occurred approximately six years
apart. Lastly, the agency found the agency responses legitimate and
non-discriminatory, with no evidence of pretext or discriminatory animus.
Complainant fails to note any material error of fact or law in
the appellate decision.<2> Accordingly, 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. 01976003
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
December 7, 2000
__________________
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 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.
2 We note that complainant raises a disability claim for the first time
in his request to reconsider. Without deciding the issue of timeliness,
should complainant wish to pursue this claim, we urge him to immediately
seek EEO counseling on this issue.