05A10373
05-24-2001
Edward Harris, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Southwest Area) Agency.
Edward Harris v. United States Postal Service
05A10373
May 24, 2001
.
Edward Harris,
Complainant,
v.
William J. Henderson,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
(Southwest Area)
Agency.
Request No. 05A10373
Appeal No. 01A10719
Agency No. 1G771001699
Hearing No. 330-99-8343
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
The complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Edward
Harris v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A10719
(February 15, 2001). Complainant alleged that he was discriminated
against on the bases of race (African-American), sex (male) and/or
retaliation (prior TitleVII activity) when he was not rehired by the
agency on October 23, 1998. 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).
In the instant request, complainant asserts that the AJ erred by crediting
the testimony of agency witnesses despite certain inconsistencies. The
inconsistencies between the testimony, complainant suggests, is sufficient
to establish that the agency's articulated reason is unworthy of belief.
In support of this argument, complainant cites to a recent Supreme Court
case in which the Court ruled that a plaintiff's prima facie case of
discrimination, combined with sufficient evidence to allow a reasonable
fact finder to reject the employer's non-discriminatory explanation,
may be adequate to sustain a finding of intentional discrimination. See
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 120 S. Ct. 2097 (2000).
Specifically, complainant points out that the various agency officials
differ as to who ultimately was responsible for the recommendation that he
not be re-hired. However, we conclude that this argument does not rebut
the agency's explanation for not rehiring him; namely, that complainant
concealed a criminal conviction from the agency.
After a review of the 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. The decision
in EEOC Appeal No. 01A10719 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
May 24, 2001
Date