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

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Apr 28, 2022

Appeal No. 2020004167 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 28, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Kendra W.,1 Complainant, v. Martin J. Walsh, Secretary, Department of Labor, Agency. Request No. 2022001773 Appeal No. 2020004167 Agency No. DOL-19-04-104 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Kendra W. v. Department of Labor, EEOC Appeal No. 2020004167 (January 10, 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). During the relevant time, Complainant worked for the Agency as a Wage and Hour Compliance Specialist in Atlanta, Georgia. 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 2022001773 On June 11, 2019, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming unlawful employment discrimination based on race, color, and age. Complainant claimed that she has been denied training on numerous occasions; she had no working telephone at her work station; she had no access to “essential tools” necessary for her job; her supervisor held her to a stricter standard than co-workers; her supervisor attempted to intimidate her to attend training, although she was caring for someone with a severe illness; her supervisor repeatedly called, texted, and emailed her about work matters while she was on bereavement leave; her supervisor referred to her in various communications by her full name, rather than her preferred name, despite having knowledge of her preference; several officials blamed her for the deportation of a petitioner, even though a co-worker handled the case in her absence; she was given a negative mid-term review, her supervisor placed her on informal counseling and required her to meet/provide a spreadsheet every week; a telework agreement was rescinded; and she was required to report communications within a set time-period; a leave request was not timely responded to, resulting in a missed scheduled appointment; she was required to provide documentation from Human Resources that showed available leave; her supervisor criticized her for no responding to work- related communications sent while she was on bereavement leave and that she responded to work-related communications while on leave at an amusement park; and informal counseling on one of her claims was extended for an additional thirty days. Following an investigation, Complainant did not request a hearing before an Administrative Judge in the required time frame. Thereafter, the Agency issued a final decision, finding no discrimination. In the prior decision, in Appeal No. 2020004167, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision. We have reviewed the arguments raised by Complainant in the instant request for reconsideration. We agree with the Agency that with the exception of several modifications, the arguments raised are virtually identical to arguments which were raised below. 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. 2020004167 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 4 2022001773 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 April 28, 2022 Date