[Redacted], Juanita K., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southern Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 12, 2021

Appeal No. 2019003638 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 12, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Juanita K.,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southern Area), Agency. Request No. 2020005346 Appeal No. 2019003638 Agency No. 4G-752-0334-18 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Juanita K. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 2019003638 (Aug. 4, 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). In her underlying complaint, Complainant, a Rural Carrier Associate at the Agency’s Post Office in Rowlett, Texas, alleged that the Agency subjected her to unlawful discrimination on the bases of her sex (female) and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity, beginning on or about June 14, 2018, when: 1. her schedule and assigned work duties were constantly changing and management would not provide her with a text message of her schedule or changes to her schedule; 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. 2020005346 2 2. there were times when her name was removed from the schedule; 3. the Postmaster sent an email to other [facility managers] telling them not to schedule Complainant for work resulting in Complainant not [being] provided the opportunity to work at other facilities; 4. she was yelled at by management, spoken to inappropriately and management would talk about her with other carriers; and 5. on August 25, 2018 through September 7, 2018, she was charged Absent Without Official Leave (AWOL). Following an investigation, the Agency issued a final decision finding that Complainant had failed to prove discrimination. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision concluding that Complainant had failed to prove that the Agency’s reasons for its actions were pretextual or that the alleged harassment was motivated by discriminatory animus. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates the factual arguments she raised on appeal. The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. 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. We find that Complainant’s arguments do not 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. Accordingly, we find that Complainant has failed to demonstrate that the Commission should reconsider its appellate decision. 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. 2019003638 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. 2020005346 3 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 January 12, 2021 Date