Thomas A. Ficht, Complainant,v.Andrew M. Cuomo, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 31, 2000
05a00355 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 31, 2000)

05a00355

03-31-2000

Thomas A. Ficht, Complainant, v. Andrew M. Cuomo, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Agency.


Thomas A. Ficht v. Department of Housing and Urban Development

05A00355

March 31, 2000

Thomas A. Ficht, )

Complainant, )

)

) Request No. 05A00355

v. ) Appeal No. 01983672

) Agency No. AT 95-07

Andrew M. Cuomo, )

Secretary, )

Department of Housing and Urban )

Development, )

Agency. )

)

____________________________________)

DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

On February 8, 2000, Thomas A. Ficht (complainant) timely initiated a

request to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the Commission)

to reconsider the decisions in Ficht v. Dept. of Housing and Urban

Development, EEOC Appeal No. 01983672 (January 19, 2000).<1> EEOC

regulations provide that the Commissioners may, in their discretion,

reconsider any previous decision where the party demonstrates that:

(1) the previous decision involved clearly erroneous interpretation

of material fact or law; or (2) the decision will have a substantial

impact on the policies, practices or operation of the agency.

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.405(b)).

Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging discrimination based on age

(62) and reprisal (prior EEO activity) when he was not selected for the

position of Director, Atlanta Community Planning and Development and

when his position as Director of the Program Management Division was

abolished. The complaint was investigated and the agency issued a

decision finding no discrimination.<2> Complainant filed an appeal with

the Commission which affirmed the agency's decision.

In his request for reconsideration, complainant points to some errors

in the previous decision which have since been corrected. Others do not

change the substantive findings of the decision. In addition, complainant

makes arguments that he admits were previously made. Complainant points

to areas where he felt the agency lied or where he felt the agency was

"in collusion" against him. Complainant mentions evidence that is in

the record and previously considered in reaching the decision below and,

taking into consideration complainant's current arguments, we find no

reason to disturb the previous decision. Complainant has not submitted

any new evidence. The request is denied.

After a review of complainant's request to reconsider, the previous

decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that complainant's

request does not meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. �1614.405(b), and

it is the decision of the Commission to deny complainant's request.

The decision of the Commission in Appeal Nos. 01983672 remains the

Commission's final decision. There is no further right of administrative

appeal from a decision of the Commission on a request for reconsideration.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P1199)

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:

March 31, 2000

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal

sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply to all

fderal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative

process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations

found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.

2In its decision, the agency first proposed dismissing the issue of

the position abolishment in that at the time complainant contacted

the EEO counselor it was merely proposed that the position be

eliminated. However, the agency then analyzed the merits of the claim

and found no discrimination.