[Redacted], Kenny C.., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Northeast Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Aug 11, 2021

Appeal No. 2020002681 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 11, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Kenny C..,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Northeast Area), Agency. Request No. 2021003095 Appeal No. 2020002681 Hearing No. 520-2019-00343X Agency No. 4B-040-0017-18 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020002681 (March 29, 2021). 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 relevant time, Complainant was employed by the Agency as a Postmaster, EAS-18, at its Scarborough Post Office in Scarborough, Maine. On March 30, 2018, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging discrimination by the Agency based on race (African-American) and in reprisal for prior EEO activity when on or 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. 2021003095 2 about November 16, 2017, he became aware he was not selected (i.e., not offered an opportunity to be interviewed) for the Postmaster position in Yarmouth, Maine. After its investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of right to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant requested a hearing. The Agency submitted a motion for a decision without a hearing. The AJ subsequently issued a decision by summary judgment in favor of the Agency. The AJ made the following pertinent findings. An Agency three-person review committee reviewed all of the 12 applicants’ responses to the KSA (knowledge, skills, and abilities) sections of the posting for the EAS-20 Postmaster position at issue. The review committee did not refer Complainant and seven other applicants (who were all White) for an interview because they did not have high total scores based on the KSA. Complainant received the score of 15 and seven non-referred applicants received the scores of 15, 13, 11, 9, 0, 0, and 0. The four applicants who received top scores of 16, 17, 18, and 22 were referred for an interview. Complainant thus was not selected for the position. The Agency issued its final order adopting the AJ’s finding that Complainant failed to prove discrimination as alleged. In EEOC Appeal No. 2020002681, we concluded that the evidence of record fully supported the AJ’s decision that Complainant’s allegations of discrimination had not been proven. In his request for reconsideration of that decision, Complainant essentially repeats the same arguments made and considered during his original appeal. We emphasize that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. See EEO MD-110, Ch. 9, § VII.A. 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. 2020002681 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. 2021003095 3 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 August 11, 2021 Date