05a20827
08-14-2002
Veronica LaRose v. United States Postal Service 05A20827 08-14-02 .Veronica LaRose, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Veronica LaRose v. United States Postal Service
05A20827
08-14-02
.Veronica LaRose,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Request No. 05A20827
Appeal No. 01994596
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
On May 23, 2002, Veronica LaRose (hereinafter referred to as complainant)
initiated a timely request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (Commission) to reconsider the decision in Veronica LaRose
v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service,
EEOC Appeal No. 01994596 (April 24, 2002). EEOC Regulations provide
that the Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider any previous
decision where the party demonstrates that: (1) the previous decision
involved a 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. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
ISSUE PRESENTED
The issue herein is whether the previous decision properly affirmed the
final agency decision finding that complainant had not been subjected to
race/color (black), sex (female), and disability (Post Traumatic Stress
Syndrome) discrimination.
BACKGROUND
A review of the record reveals that complainant filed a formal EEO
complaint in July 1998, alleging that she was discriminated against on
the bases of her race/color, sex, and disability when she was assigned
to Tour 1 at the Bulk Mail Center. The agency accepted complainant's
complaint for processing, and conducted an investigation. The agency
then provided complainant with a copy of the investigative report and
notified her of her right to request an administrative hearing within
30 days. Complainant did not respond to the notice within the specified
time period. Therefore, the agency issued a final decision finding that
she had not been subjected to discrimination as alleged. Specifically,
the agency determined that complainant failed to establish a prima facie
case with regard to any cited basis. On appeal, the previous decision
affirmed the final agency decision, stating that the agency's ultimate
finding was supported by the record.
In her request for reconsideration, complainant asserted that the agency
violated Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) regulations
when it offered her the position.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
As discussed above, the Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider
any previous decision when the party requesting reconsideration submits
written argument which tends to establish that at least one of the
criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b) is met. In order for a case to be
reconsidered, the request must contain specific information which meets
the requirements of this regulation. For the reasons set forth below,
the Commission denies complainant's request for reconsideration.
A careful review of the record reveals that the agency correctly
determined that complainant was not subjected to discrimination with
regard to the matter alleged. Specifically, even assuming that
complainant established a prima facie case of race/color, sex, or
disability discrimination, she failed to show that the agency's stated
reason for the action, that the only positions available were on Tour 1,
was a pretext for discrimination. Further, the Commission notes that
complainant's assertion concerning the violation of OWCP Regulations
falls outside the scope of the EEO process. Accordingly, we find that the
previous decision properly affirmed the May 7, 1999 final agency decision.
CONCLUSION
After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, the previous
decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that complainant's
request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. �1614.405(b), and
it is therefore the decision of the Commission to DENY complainant's
request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01994596 (April 24, 2002)
remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further right of
administrative appeal on a decision of the Commission on this request
for reconsideration.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS ON 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
________08-14-02__________________________
Date