[Redacted], Billy B., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Western Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 16, 2022

Appeal No. 2021000866 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 16, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Caroline E.,1 Complainant, v. Lloyd Austin III, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Media Activity), Agency. Request No. 2021003853 Appeal No. 2020004875 Agency No. 2019-DMA-002 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Caroline E. v. Department of Defense (Defense Media Activity), EEOC Appeal No. 2020004875 (May 19, 2021). 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). During the relevant time, Complainant worked as a Supervisor Contract Specialist, GS-14, assigned to the Agency’s Acquisition & Procurement Division in Fort Meade, Maryland, effective May 13, 2018. Complainant’s appointment was subject to a one-year probationary period. 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. 3 2021003853 On July 29, 2019, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming discrimination based on disability, and in reprisal for prior protected activity, when she was removed from her Supervisory Contract Specialist position, and was demoted to a GS-13 Contract Specialist position. Following an investigation, the Agency issued a final decision on March 9, 2020, finding no discrimination and provided Complainant with appeal rights to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The MSPB dismissed the appeal, on the grounds that it lacked jurisdiction due to Complainant’s probationary status. Complainant was advised that she could have a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge, or she could file an appeal with the Commission from the March 9, 2020 final decision. Complainant appealed. The prior appellate decision affirmed the Agency’s final decision, which determined no discrimination or unlawful retaliation was established. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant, through counsel, submits a brief expressing disagreement with the appellate decision, A comparison of the arguments raised on appeal from the Agency’s final decision and the arguments raised in the instant request, reflects that Complainant reiterates arguments previously made, or which could have been made below. However, we emphasize 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), Chap. 9 § VI.A (Aug. 5, 2015); 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. 2020004875 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. 4 2021003853 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 September 13, 2021 Date