05a00515
11-28-2000
Phillip H. Monroe, Complainant, v. Daniel R. Glickman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.
Phillip H. Monroe v. Department of Agriculture
05A00515
November 28, 2000
.
Phillip H. Monroe,
Complainant,
v.
Daniel R. Glickman,
Secretary,
Department of Agriculture,
Agency.
Request No. 05A00515
Appeal No. 01992809
Agency No. 950623
Hearing No. 140-97-8203X-RNS
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Phillip
H. Monroe v. Department of Agriculture, EEOC Appeal No. 01992809
(March 6, 2000).<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).
In the underlying complaint, complainant alleged he was discriminated
against based on race (Black), age (62), and in reprisal for prior EEO
activity, when he was belatedly designated Acting County Supervisor in the
Elizabethtown County Office between September 29 and October 20, 1994.
An EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) issued a decision without a hearing
finding no discrimination, and the agency adopted the finding of no
discrimination in its final agency decision (FAD). This Commission's
previous decision affirmed the FAD.
In his request for reconsideration, complainant contends: (1) the AJ's
Order dated June 27, 1997, provided that motions for summary judgment
were due at least twenty calendar days prior to the date of the final
pre-hearing conference, yet the agency filed its motion on August 24,
1998, one week after the pre-hearing conference, and several days later
the AJ issued a notice of intent to issue a decision without a hearing;
(2) the AJ advised the parties at the pre-hearing conference that they
could further discuss settlement, but did not provide a time limit; and
(3) someone other than the agency representative improperly appeared at
the pre-hearing conference and handled the representative's duties.
In its brief opposing complainant's request for reconsideration,
the agency contends: (1) its motion for summary judgment was allowed
by the AJ, and complainant was permitted an opportunity to respond;
(2) there is no requirement that a deadline be announced for informal
settlement discussions, which may take place at any time; and (3) the
pre-hearing conference summary contained in the record establishes that
when the agency representative appeared at the pre-hearing conference
with an agency witness whom she stated was there to assist her, the AJ
advised the agency that this was improper, and excluded the witness from
the conference.
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. 01992809 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
November 28, 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.