05a30467
03-17-2003
William T. Collum, Complainant, v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
William T. Collum v. Department of Veterans Affairs
05A30467
3/17/03
.
William T. Collum,
Complainant,
v.
Anthony J. Principi,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request No. 05A30467
Appeal No. 01A21611
Agency No. 20012465
Hearing No. 130-A1-8209X
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
William T. Collum (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the
decision in William T. Collum v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC
Appeal No. 01A21611 (January 21, 2003). EEOC Regulations provide that
the Commission may, in its discretion, 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).
The record reveals that complainant, a Staff Pharmacist at the agency's
Central Alabama Veterans Health Care System, West Campus facility,
filed a formal EEO complaint on July 12, 2000, alleging that the agency
subjected him to a hostile work environment on the basis of his disability
(depression, anxiety), as evidenced by the following:
(1) on February 8, 2000, the Chief of Pharmacy Service (RMO) told him
that his request for administrative leave for February 25, 2000 was
denied and that he would have to use annual leave to attend a training
course in Atlanta, Georgia.<1> During this conversation, RMO asked �why
don't you just quit and go work for CVS?�;
since February 8, 2000, RMO continually invaded complainant's personal
space by entering his work area and standing or sitting directly behind
complainant while he waited on patients at the Pharmacy Window;
on or about March 4, 2000, complainant was advised that RMO made several
attempts to access his Employee Health Records;
on March 19, 2000, RMO picked up a large pair of scissors and began
swinging them around, while clapping them together. On that same day,
RMO pointed to another individual and said �there's your replacement,�
which complainant found to be intimidating;
on April 10, 2000, a co-worker told complainant that RMO told everyone
in the unit that complainant was going to be suspended for 10 days;
on May 30, 2000, complainant was advised in writing of a one day
suspension; and
on June 29, 2000, complainant was informed that he would be reassigned
to the East Campus that was located in Tuskegee, Alabama and that his
wife would be banned from the pharmacy.
The prior decision affirmed an AJ's decision without a hearing, which
found that complainant failed to establish a genuine dispute that a
material fact existed. Specifically, complainant failed to provide
sufficient evidence that any of the agency's actions occurred because
of complainant's disability. After a review of complainant's request
for reconsideration, 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. In complainant's request, he argues that he did dispute the
agency's reasons for its actions, and therefore, the prior decision was
clearly erroneous. However, we disagree with complainant's claims and
find that the ultimate issue, whether complainant was harassed because
of his disability, is not in dispute. The decision in EEOC Appeal
No. 01A21611 remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further
right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this
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
3/17/03
Date
1 Complainant alleged that his request for annual leave was also denied.