[Redacted], Kory V., 1 Complainant,v.Frank Kendall, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 28, 2022

Appeal No. 2020000534 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 28, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Kory V.,1 Complainant, v. Frank Kendall, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency. Request No. 2022000383 Appeal No. 2020000534 Agency No. 9R1M1741125 Hearing No. 410-2019-00011X DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Kory V. v Department of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. 2020000534 (July 21, 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 for the Agency as a Maintenance Production Analyst at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. On November 17, 2017, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming discrimination based on race, color, age, and in reprisal for prior protected activity. Complainant claimed that he had not been selected for a Production and Material Support Supervisor position. 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 2022000383 Complainant also claimed that he was harassed when he received a Notice of Decision to Reprimand, he was moved to another cubicle and given a verbal No Contact Order (NCO), he was moved to Functional Test, he was issued a written NCO, he was issued NCO restrictions, and a meeting was scheduled which was an attempt to set Complainant up to violate the NCO. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an Administrative Judge (AJ). Thereafter, the AJ issued a summary judgment decision, finding no discrimination. The Agency issued a final order implementing the AJ’s decision. In EEOC Appeal No. 2020000534, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final order, implementing the AJ’s summary judgment decision. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant submits a brief expressing disagreement with the appellate decision. The arguments raised in the instant request, however, were either raised on appeal from the Agency’s final decision or could have been raised below. 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. 2020000534 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 2 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. 2 Because we have denied Complainant’s request for reconsideration, we find it unnecessary to address the Agency’s appellate argument that the reconsideration request was not timely filed. 4 2022000383 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 March 28, 2022 Date