05A10593
10-02-2001
Saeed U. Din v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
05A10593
10-02-01
.
Saeed U. Din,
Complainant,
v.
Curt Herbert, Jr.
Chairman,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Agency.
Request No. 05A10593
Appeal No. 01A11563
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Saeed
U. Din v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, EEOC Appeal No. 01A11563
(April 11, 2001). 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).
To prevail in a disparate treatment claim such as this, complainant
must satisfy the three-part evidentiary scheme fashioned by the Supreme
Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). He
must generally establish a prima facie case by demonstrating that
he was subjected to an adverse employment action under circumstances
that would support an inference of discrimination. Furnco Construction
Co. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567, 576 (1978). The prima facie inquiry may be
dispensed with in this case, however, since the agency has articulated
legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for its conduct. See United
States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711,
713-17 (1983). To ultimately prevail, complainant must prove, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the agency's explanation is a pretext
for discrimination. St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502,
519 (1993).
The agency found that the reasons articulated by the agency for not
selecting complainant were not a pretext for discrimination on either
basis alleged. Complainant had submitted his application late, but the
selecting official accepted it anyway. But before complainant filed his
application, the agency's personnel office had already forwarded a merit
promotion certificate which contained the names of twelve candidates
deemed best qualified. Although the vacancy announcement indicated that
there would be multiple vacancies, the selecting official chose only one
candidate. The selectee had already been working in the public utilities
division as a technician, and had earned a college degree while doing so.
The selecting official reiterated that the selectee was the best candidate
for the position. He also noted that other applications were superior
to complainant's. Complainant failed to establish that the agency's
articulated reason was pretext for discrimination.
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. 01A11563 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
_____10-02-01_____________
Date