U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Lashell S.,1 Complainant, v. Janet L. Yellen, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, (Internal Revenue Service Office of Chief Counsel), Agency. Request Nos. 2022003872, 2022003873, 2022003874 Appeal Nos. 2021003806, 2021003808, 2021003809 Hearing Nos. 570-2019-00531X, 570-2019-01083X, 570-220-00010X Agency Nos. IRSCC-18-0143-F. IRSCC-19-0196-F, IRSCC-19-0713-F DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its consolidated decision in EEOC Appeal Nos. 2021003806, 2021003808, and 2021003809 (June 7, 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 an attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel in Washington, D.C. 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 2022003872, 2022003873, 2022003874 In December 2017 and May 2018, Complainant filed the three EEO complaints claiming discrimination based on race, national origin, sex, disability, age, and in reprisal for prior protected activity. In the three complaints, Complainant claimed that she learned she would not receive a performance award for fiscal year 2016-2017; she was not selected for a Senior Technician Reviewer position; she was not selected for a Branch Chief position; she was issued an inappropriately low performance appraisal for the 2017-208 rating period; she was not considered for a lateral Branch Chief assignment; she was harassed by co-workers and managers; she learned in June 2018 that she was not selected for three vacancies; she was not assigned adequate and quality work; in November 2018 she learned that she was not selected for various vacancies; she received a negative mid-year progress review in October 2018; as of December 2018, she had not received an award for the 2017-2018 rating period; management refused to provide her with information to prepare for a performance review and issued an appraisal with false, inaccurate, and misleading information resulting in unequal wages; and she was not selected for a management detail. Following the Agency’s EEO investigations into her claims, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The assigned AJ consolidated the three complaints for adjudication and issued a summary judgment decision in favor of the Agency. Thereafter, the Agency issued a final order implementing the AJ’s decision. Complainant filed an appeal. In a consolidated decision in EEOC Appeal Nos. 2021003806, 2021003808, and 2021003809, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final order implementing the AJ’s summary judgment decision finding no discrimination or unlawful retaliation was established. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant submits extensive documentation as she had done below when she appealed the Agency’s final orders. However, despite such extensive documentation, we discern no error in the prior appellate decision. 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 consolidated decision in EEOC Appeal Nos. 2021003806, 2021003808, and 2021003809 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 3 2022003872, 2022003873, 2022003874 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 November 7, 2022 Date