0520120359
12-06-2012
James C. Latham, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southwest Area), Agency.
James C. Latham,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southwest Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120359
Appeal No. 0120113915
Agency No. 4G-760-0079-11
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in James C. Latham v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120113915 (January 24, 2012). 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 our previous decision, we affirmed the Agency's dismissal of Complainant's complaint for failure to state a claim. We noted that Complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination when the Agency failed to comply with a "May 24, 2011, compliance date" regarding the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act (ADAAA) and the Schedule A Hiring Authority. We found that Complainant's assertions lacked the specificity necessary to indentify a personal loss or harm to a term, condition, or privilege of his employment.
We also noted that Complainant was previously sent home under the Agency's National Reassessment Process (NRP) in April 2010. We noted that Complainant raised this matter with an EEO Counselor in May 2010. We noted that a complaint that states the same claim that is pending before or has been decided by the Commission must be dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1). We therefore affirmed the Agency's dismissal of Complainant's complaint.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant, in pertinent part, contends that he was sent home from work due to the NRP, and now other employees are performing the job duties that he used to perform. Complainant reiterates that the Agency has not complied with the ADAAA and a May 24, 2011, compliance date. Complainant further contends that his previous May 2010 EEO matter was subsumed into the McConnell class action. See McConnell, et al. v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0720080054 (Jan. 14, 2010).
We remind Complainant 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) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here.
We note that Complainant does not adequately specify his allegations with respect to the May 24, 2011, compliance date matter. We also note that Complainant does not dispute that his allegations pertain to being sent home as a result of the NRP. Complainant does not dispute that he previously raised this matter before an EEO Counselor and contends that this matter is now subsumed into the McConnell class action.
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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120113915 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
December 6, 2012
Date
2
0520120359
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120359