Susann G.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Headquarters), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Feb 23, 2018

0520170617 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 23, 2018)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Susann G.,1
Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Headquarters),
Agency.

Request No. 0520170617

Appeal No. 0120170971

Agency No. 6Z-000-0020-16

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120170971 (February 14, 2018).
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 the underlying complaint, Complainant alleged discrimination by the Agency based on age
(59) and sex (female) when: (1) on May 25, 2011, it reassigned Complainant from the PCES-01
pay band to the V-02 pay band without adequate justification; (2) on July 16, 2013, it effectuated
the pay band change which resulted in a $16,104 per year reduction in pay; (3) on October 22,
2015, it failed to select Complainant for an Acting Manager, Capital Investments and Business
Analysis position; and (4) on October 8, 2016, it failed to select Complainant for a Manager,
Capital Investments and Business Analysis position although Complainant’s qualifications were
superior to the selectee’s.

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.
0520170617

2

Our previous decision affirmed the dismissal of the complaint based on its untimely filing in
accordance with 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2). Complainant concedes that she received a Notice
of the Right to File (Notice) on November 10, 2016. The undisputed record shows that the
Notice was issued on November 7, 2016, but the date on the Notice was mis-typed as September
7, 2016. The documentary evidence further shows that after Complainant alerted the Agency’s
Dispute Resolution Specialist (ADR) as to the error, it was corrected and Complainant was
provided a copy of the page with the corrected date.

Contrary to Complainant’s assertions made on appeal and herein, our previous decision did not
err in failing to conclude that Complainant’s 15-day notice period started over from the date she
received the copy of the corrected page. The record shows that ADR did not provide
Complainant a new notice packet with new rights. After failing to provide Complainant with the
entire notice packet for a second time, Complainant requested the pages that followed the
coversheet with the corrected page. ADR agreed to Complainant’s request but noted that she
would send her a copy of the pages from the original Notice. In addition, the record shows that
Complainant emailed ADR in January 2017 requesting “tracking information for the second
notice to file letter with a revised date of November 7, 2016.” ADR responded “[t]here was no
second notice. I did mail a second envelope consisting of a cover letter showing the correct
informal complaint was closed – November 7. All of the forms to file a formal were mailed on
November 7th and delivered on November 10th, via Signature Confirmation 2312 0200 0000
0755 4326.” The record shows that this noted confirmation number was the same confirmation
number on both the original Notice and the corrected page, which also supports the conclusion
that the Notice was not reissued. Based upon the evidence in the record as noted above, we find
that a second Notice was never issued. The ADR simply corrected a typo in the original Notice
that was received on November 10, 2016.

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. 0120170971 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. 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.

0520170617

3

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 23, 2018
Date