[Redacted], Harris K., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southern Area), Agency.Download PDFEqual Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 11, 2021Appeal No. 2019003585 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 11, 2021) Copy Citation U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Harris K.,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southern Area), Agency. Request No. 2021000807 Appeal No. 2019003585 Hearing No. 490-2018-00132X Agency No. 4G-390-0025-18 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2019003585 (Sept. 23, 2020). 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). During the period at issue, Complainant worked at the Agency’s Post Office located in Southaven, Mississippi. On Janaury 16, 2018, Complainant filed a formal complaint claiming that the Agency subjected him to discrimination based on race (African American), color (black), sex (male), disability, age (52), and reprisal (protected EEO activity) when on October 7, 2017, he was required to work his scheduled off day during the Columbus Day holiday weekend. 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. 2021000807 2 After an investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of his right to request a hearing before an EEOC AJ. Complainant timely requested a hearing. On December 18, 2018, the Agency filed a Motion to Dismiss and Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment (Motion to Dismiss). Complainant submitted oppositions to the Agency’s Motion to Dismiss on December 28, 2018 and January 13, 2019. On April 17, 2019, the AJ granted the Agency’s Motion to Dismiss. In the dismissal decision, the AJ found that the parties had previously entered into a settlement agreement which had been fully executed and included the instant action. The Agency subsequently issued a final order adopting the AJ’s dismissal decision. Complainant filed an appeal. In our initial decision, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final action adopting the AJ’s dismissal of the instant formal complaint. EEOC Appeal No. 2019003585 (Sept. 23, 2020). In reaching this conclusion, we reasoned that the “documentary evidence shows that the [settlement agreement] encompasses the instant action, which had been initiated prior to the date that the [settlement agreement] was fully executed.” Id. Complainant filed a request for reconsideration. In his request, Complainant asserts that he made an extension request to submit a brief to OFO but never received a response. In addition, Complainant asserts that he was under duress to sign the agreement for various reasons. Complainant notes that his wife was ill and in need of surgery at that time. Complainant further asserts that he only received six days to review the agreement and was not able to consult with counsel. We find that the prior decision properly found that the instant claim was encompassed by the December 2017 settlement agreement. Provision (1) of the December 7, 2017 settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that: This settlement agreement (“Agreement”) is in full and complete settlement of all claims made in the above referenced complaint. It is further agreed that this Agreement resolves any claims, complaints, or appeals which [Complainant] has, or could have, filed or initiated up to the date this Agreement is fully executed, in any forum (including, but not limited to, EEOC, MSPB, and District Court), relating to his employment with the [Agency]. To the extent that Complainant alleges that the December 2017 settlement agreement should be set aside for various reasons, Complainant should contact the Agency’s EEO Director, in writing, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.504(a), if he wishes to pursue this matter. 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. 2019003585 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 2021000807 3 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. 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 February 11, 2021 Date Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation