0520160260
07-26-2016
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.) Office of Federal Operations * * * JANIECE H., COMPLAINANT, v. MEGAN J. BRENNAN, POSTMASTER GENERAL, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE (SOUTHERN AREA), AGENCY.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.)
Office of Federal Operations
* * * JANIECE H., COMPLAINANT,
v.
MEGAN J. BRENNAN, POSTMASTER GENERAL, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE (SOUTHERN AREA), AGENCY.
Request No. 0520160260
Appeal No. 0120143201
Agency No. 1G-756-0011-13
Hearing No. 450-2013-00227X
July 26, 2016
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120143201 (February 25, 2016). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to 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(c).
During the period at issue, Complainant worked at a Distribution Operations Supervisor, at the Agency's Network Distribution Center in Dallas, Texas. On February 1, 2013, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming that the Agency subjected her to discrimination when she was not selected for an EAS-18 Operations Support Specialist position in December 2012; and that since January 2013, Agency officials refused to allow Complainant to cover an EAS-19 Distributions Operations Manager position. The prior appellate decision affirmed the EEOC Administrative Judge's (AJ) summary judgment decision, in favor of the Agency, finding no discrimination.
Specifically, the Commission previously determined that there were no genuine issues of material fact regarding the Agency motivation in connection with either of the subject claims. Moreover, the Commission found that the Agency provided legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for its actions, and that Complainant provided no evidence of pretext regarding either claim.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant presents no evidence or arguments regarding the AJ's interpretation of material fact or law or that the appellate decision will have substantial impact on the policies of the Agency.
After a careful review of the record, we find that the AJ properly determined that there was no genuine issue of material fact in this case. 29 C.F.R. �1614.109(e)(3). Specifically, we find no reason to disagree with the AJ's finding that complainant failed to set forth sufficient facts showing that there was a genuine issue still in dispute. The AJ's decision indicates that the AJ considered all of the evidence of record, and concluded that no genuine issue of material fact was presented. Our review of the record confirms that Complainant failed to show a dispute concerning a material fact sufficient to sustain her objection to summary judgment. Therefore, we concur in the AJ's determination and find that summary judgment was appropriate in this case.
We emphasize that the request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. See EEO MD-110, Ch 9. (Section) 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, 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. 0120143201 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. The Agency shall comply with the Order as set forth below.
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.
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
Director
Office of Federal Operations
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.