0520100259
07-15-2010
Victor Jones, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency.
Victor Jones,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Pacific Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520100259
Appeal No. 0120080704
Hearing No. 480-2006-00268X
Agency Nos. 4F-913-0041-06, 4F-913-0075-05, 4F-913-0122-06
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Victor
Jones v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120080704
(December 17, 2009). 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(b).
In the underlying case, Complainant alleged that he was discriminated
against, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title
VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq., and Section 501 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �
791 et seq., on the bases of race (Black), disability (on-the-job foot
injury/bilateral plantar fasciitis), and reprisal for prior protected
EEO activity arising under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act when: (1)
from June 14, 2005 through July 16, 2005, he was subjected to a hostile
work environment; (2) in December 2005, he was continually scheduled to
start later than other carriers; (3) on December 28, 2005, he was issued
a 14-day suspension; (4) on February 4, 2005 through February 22, 2005,
and on April 10, 2005, the Agency refused to comply with his medical
restrictions; (5) on February 7, 2006, he was issued a 14-day suspension;
(6) on February 23, 2006, he was placed on administrative leave and,
as of March 22, 2006, he had not received documentation regarding this
action and his pay was delayed during this period; (7) on March 15, 2006,
he was issued instructions for a fitness-for-duty exam; (8) on May 16,
2006, he was denied time on the clock to prepare a response on an EEO
complaint; (9) on April 12, 2006 and ongoing, as a senior PTF, he was
not assigned to work more than eight hours a day or 40 hours a week;
(10) on May 3, 2006, he was verbally threatened by a Temporary Supervisor
(204B) by being told he was the "stupidest" and "dumbest Black employee";
(11) on June 2, 2006, he was issued a Notice of Emergency Suspension;
and (12) on July 20, 2006, he was issued a Notice of Removal dated July
14, 2006.
The Commission affirmed the final order of the Agency, which adopted the
EEOC Administrative Judge's (AJ) decision. The AJ found, after a hearing,
that Complainant failed to prove that he was subject to discrimination
as alleged.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates his arguments
from his appeal concerning claims 2, 9, 11, and 12. With regard to claims
2 and 9, Complainant asserts that the AJ ignored the fact that he was
forced to begin work later than other employees and worked less hours
than other employees in his category. With regard to claims 11 and 12,
Complainant asserts that the Agency based its issuance of disciplinary
actions on hearsay statements from postal customers. Complainant contends
that, as the customers' statements were never verified as authentic
and the customers did not testify at any administrative hearing,
the statements should not have been accepted as "business reasons"
for taking disciplinary actions against him.
Complainant is reminded that a "request for reconsideration is not a
second appeal to the Commission." Equal Employment Opportunity Management
Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at 9-17 (Nov. 9, 1999).
Because Complainant has not put forth any arguments or contentions that
were not previously considered in rendering the underlying decision,
the Commission finds that Complainant did not demonstrate that the
underlying decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of
material fact or law.
After reconsidering 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. 0120080704 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.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0610)
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 from the Court that
the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also
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 with
the Court 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
July 15, 2010
Date
2
0520100259
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520100259