0520120453
06-12-2012
Donald F. Carpus,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southeast Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120453
Appeal No. 0120101384
Agency No. 4H-335-0004-09
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Donald F. Carpus v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120101384 (August 6, 2010). 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).
During the relevant period, Complainant worked as a Part-Time Flexible (PTF) Carrier at the Agency's Brandon, Florida Post Office. On January 28, 2009, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against him on the bases of disability (chronic pancreatitis, diabetes and kidney disease) and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when:
1. in September 2008, it did not assign him the route that he successfully bid on;
2. between September and October 2008, it scheduled him for fewer hours than other PTF Carriers;
3. it subjected him to harassment in that he was threatened with discipline, threatened to be fired, singled out and told to stay in his case and was watched over "like a kid," repeatedly asked for Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) documentation that had already been submitted, shorted his pay, scheduled him to work fewer than 40 hours per week, failed to train him as promised, denied his request to be allowed to work closer to his home, gave him an investigative interview for attendance deficiencies, subjected him to constant offensive and unnecessary remarks from other employees, and yelled at him and told him to get off the workroom floor on or about April 20, 2009;
4. on May 20, 2009 and continuing, it failed to provide him a reasonable accommodation and placed him out of work;
5. on June 15, 2009, it did not allow him to drive; and
6. on June 16, 2009, it did not give him a Hold Down route.
In a January 25, 2010 final decision, the Agency found no discrimination. Complainant filed an appeal, which was docketed as EEOC Appeal No. 0120101384. In Carpus v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120101384 (August 6, 2010), the Commission affirmed the Agency's finding of no discrimination. The instant request for reconsideration from Complainant followed.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant stated: the sole intention of the Agency was to get rid of him and they eventually did; the Agency assigned him less work hours than other PTF carriers; the Agency constantly disapproved his FMLA documentation; he was threatened with discipline; management never trained him to work a large truck as they promised; he was given offensive nicknames and yelled at for not moving as fast as they wanted; management denied knowing he was ill, denied him reasonable accommodation, and took a clerk job away from him; the reasonable accommodation committee cleared him to work and then denied him work; he was told to get off of the workroom floor in front of other employees; employees from outside stations were brought in to perform work he could have performed; he was not allowed to investigate his matters; he went through daily harassment and threats; he was made to wear worn sneakers without a uniform; and that the Agency intentionally did not post hold down routes to prevent Complainant from putting in for them.
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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. Complainant reiterated prior contentions that were considered under the appellate decision. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120101384 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
06/12/2012
__________________
Date
2
05-2012-0453
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120453