[Redacted], Barbie W., 1 Complainant,v.Christine Wormuth, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 5, 2023

Appeal No. 2021000636 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 5, 2023)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Barbie W.,1 Complainant, v. Christine Wormuth, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency. Request No. 2022004611 Appeal No. 2021000636 Agency No. ARFTBUCH19JUL02435 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Barbie W. v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 2021000636 (Aug. 2, 2022). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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(c). On October 3, 2019, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that she was subjected to discriminatory harassment based on sex when: 1. On February 9, 2012, the Resource Management Director, also Complainant’s first-line supervisor (“S1”), failed to treat her with dignity and respect when he threatened to take away her compressed work schedule for being late to work. 2. On September 8, 2014, S1 authorized the acting supervisor to telephone Complainant with intimidation about returning to work before doctor’s orders. 1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website. 2022004611 2 3. In December 2014, the Chief, Manpower and Agreements ignored her verbal request for reassignment to the Manpower section. 4. On April 27, 2015, S1 issued her a Memorandum for Tardiness and Unscheduled Absences. 5. On May 22, 2015, S1 threatened to disapprove her annual leave for her son’s Air Force graduation ceremony. 6. On May 29, 2015, S1 yelled at her to stop reading the Bible verse during the duty day actions. 7. On February 20, 2018, the Manpower Section Supervisor insulted her regarding an employee’s travel profile. 8. On June 18, 2018, S1 hindered her from creating an employee’s travel profile. 9. On May 10, 2019, S1 threatened to take away her compressed work schedule for arriving to work 10 minutes late. Complainant requested an Agency decision. The Agency issued a decision finding that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged. Complainant appealed, and the Commission’s prior decision affirmed the Agency’s decision. In her request, Complainant provides no evidence to warrant granting her request. The Commission emphasizes 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) (Aug. 5, 2015), at 9-18; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here. 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(c), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2021000636 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 2022004611 3 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 (Z0815) If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits). FOR THE COMMISSION: ______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature Carlton M. Hadden, Director Office of Federal Operations January 5, 2023 Date