05980134
11-08-1999
Patricia G. Peck, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency,
Patricia G. Peck v. United States Postal Service
05980134
November 8, 1999
Patricia G. Peck, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Request No. 05980134
) Appeal No. 01966809
William J. Henderson, ) Agency No. 4C-080-1015-96
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency, )
)
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Appellant timely initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission to reconsider the decision in Patricia G. Peck v. Marvin
T. Runyon, Jr., Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, EEOC
Appeal No. 01966809 (October 10, 1997). EEOC regulations provide that
the Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider any previous decision.
29 C.F.R. � 1614.407(a). The party requesting reconsideration must
submit written argument or evidence that tends to establish one or more
of the three criteria prescribed by 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407(c): that new and
material evidence was available that was not available when the previous
decision was issued, 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407(c)(1); that the previous
decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law or regulation, or
material fact, or a misapplication of established policy, 29 C.F.R. �
1614.407(c)(2); or that the decision is of such exceptional nature as
to have substantial precedential effects, 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407(c)(3).
Appellant filed a complaint in which she alleged that the agency
discriminated against her on the basis of race (White) when:
On June 30, 1995, appellant's supervisor left her paycheck in an unlocked
drawer;
From July 1995 until her resignation, the supervisor repeatedly denied
her requests for window training;
On July 22, 1995, the supervisor denied appellant's request to leave
work early;
On August 19, 1995, appellant submitted a leave request which the
supervisor did not approve until September 12th;
On September 11, 1995, the agency assigned a new employee to perform
the window duties for which appellant was denied training; and
On September 13, 1995, the supervisor denied appellant's sick leave
request, which caused appellant to use sick leave, and to resign on
September 15th.
The agency accepted allegations (2), (4), (5), (6) but dismissed
allegations (1) and (3) on the grounds that appellant failed to timely
contact an EEO counselor. The counselor's report indicates that appellant
did not contact an EEO counselor until September 21, 1995, more than 45
days after the occurrence of the incidents at issue in allegations (1) and
(3). The agency also found that appellant did not establish a continuing
violation. The previous decision summarily affirmed. In her request for
reconsideration, appellant appears to be contesting the agency's dismissal
of allegations (1) and (3) on the merits. She does not, however, present
any arguments or evidence that any of the reconsideration criteria have
been established. We therefore find that the previous decision correctly
affirmed the agency's dismissal of allegations (1) and (3).
After a review of appellant's request for reconsideration, the
agency's response, the previous decision, and the entire record, the
Commission finds that appellant's request does not meet the criteria
of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407(c), and it is the decision of the Commission
to deny appellant's request. The decision of the Commission in Appeal
No. 01966809 remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further
right of administrative appeal from a decision of the Commission on a
request for reconsideration.
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0993)
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.
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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:
Nov. 8, 1999
DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations