Lynette B.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Eastern Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Oct 18, 2018

0520180402 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 18, 2018)

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

Lynette B.,1
Complainant,

v.

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

Request No. 0520180402

Appeal No. 0120162789

Agency No. 1C371005715

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120162789 (Apr. 19, 2018). 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).

In the underlying complaint, Complainant alleged that the Agency subjected her to a hostile work
environment and discriminated against her based on sex (female), disability (depression and job-
related stress, anxiety), age (64), and reprisal (prior) protected EEO activity when: (1) on a date
not specified in July 2015, a subordinate employee (El) created a hostile work environment and
management did nothing; (2) on February 24, 2016, Complainant was asked to provide medical
documentation substantiating her ability to work; (3) on February 24, 2016, Complainant's
manager suggested she retire; (4) on February 24, 2016, Complainant was told that she could only
use four hours of personal leave per day; (5) on Apri1 l5, 2016, Complainant became aware that

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.
0520180402

2
Human Resources had controverted her Office of Workers' Compensation (OWCP); (6) on
February 25, 2016, Complainant was sent home and told not to return until cleared for duty by her
doctor.

Our previous decision affirmed the dismissal of Claim (5), for failure to state a claim. We also
affirmed the Agency’s conclusion that Complainant failed to present sufficient evidence of
discriminatory/retaliatory animus with respect to Claims (1) and (3). With respect to Claims (2),
(4), and (6), we affirmed the Agency’s finding that the preponderance of the evidence established
that the medical-related inquiries and surrounding events were job-related and consistent with
business necessity. Lastly, with respect to Complainant’s harassment claim, we affirmed the
Agency’s conclusion that the evidence in the record did not support the finding that the Agency’s
conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment or that such
conduct was motivated by discriminatory/retaliatory animus.

The Commission emphasizes that 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 (Aug. 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.

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. 0120162789 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.

0520180402

3
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

October 18, 2018
Date