[Redacted], Chad T., 1 Complainant,v.Martin J. Walsh, Secretary, Department of Labor, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 24, 2022

Appeal No. 2020002877 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 24, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Chad T.,1 Complainant, v. Martin J. Walsh, Secretary, Department of Labor, Agency. Request No. 2021005025 Appeal No. 2020002877 Agency No. 17-05-008 Hearing No. 443-2019-00089X DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020002877 (August 4, 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 an Equal Employment Opportunity Specialist at the Agency’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs in Minneapolis, Minnesota. On October 30, 2017, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming discrimination based on race, sex, disability, age, and in reprisal for prior protected activity. 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. 2 2021005025 The formal complaint was comprised of 32 claims, including the following incidents: he was micromanaged and harassed, although his supervisor failed to give him feedback as required by his reasonable accommodation; management delayed his pay receipt and dismissed his findings in several cases; his military status on WEBTA was changed so that he could not use military leave; he received an “Effective” rating on a performance appraisal, and a smaller bonus award than a comparable peer; he was required to find someone to cover his shift on November 24, 2017; his supervisor approved, but then reverted, his leave requests on multiple occasions; his supervisor violated the terms of a reasonable accommodation when he failed to provide Complainant with feedback on his work; and he was not selected for a position in February 2018. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). When Complainant failed to file a response as directed, the assigned AJ dismissed Complainant’s hearing request and remanded the complaint to the Agency for issuance of a final decision. On February 7, 2020, the Agency issued a final decision. Therein, the Agency dismissed one claim for untimely EEO contact but still considered the matter in the context of a broader harassment claim. The Agency also found no discrimination was established. On appeal, in EEOC Appeal No. 2020002877, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. In the instant request for reconsideration, we have carefully reviewed Complainant’s arguments. We note, however, that during the original appeal, Complainant did not file a brief, but only filed a reply to the Agency’s opposition brief which had requested affirmance of the final decision. In the prior decision, the Commission declined to consider Complainant’s reply brief. The matters which Complainant raises in the instant request could readily have been raised below if he had initially filed a brief in support of his appeal. 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. 2020002877 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 3 2021005025 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 24, 2022 Date