[Redacted], Tiffanie S., 1 Complainant,v.Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 19, 2022

Appeal No. 2020001356 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 19, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Tiffanie S.,1 Complainant, v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency. Request No. 2021004542 Appeal No. 2020001356 Hearing No. 430-2016-00344X Agency No. 2004-0652-2015103966 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020001356 (July 14, 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 the GS-13 Chief of the Physical Therapy Department within the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Service, at the VA Medical Center in Richmond, Virginia. Complainant filed a formal complaint, subsequently amended, claiming discrimination and a hostile work environment based on race, sex, disability, 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. 2021004542 2 Complainant made numerous allegations, including that management met with members of Complainant’s staff to ask their input regarding staffing issues; management failed to include Complainant in crucial aspects management and operations, isolated her from ongoing day-to- day involvement, prevented her from accessing company data, and hindered her ability to do her job; management gave preferential treatment to two other colleagues to increase their staff, but not to increase Complainant’s staff; management met with applicants for positions in physical therapy without her input; management removed Complainant from the Resource Management Committee, the chain of command regarding promotional requests, and from attending meetings regarding physical therapy issues; management sent Complainant a harassing email; Complainant’s requests for equipment, computers, phones, additional staffing, additional workspace for staff, and treatment mats were ignored; management ignored Complainant’s request for staffing needs, while her white peers’ staffing requirements were met; management gave Complainant verbal counseling, denied her request to attend a conference, and removed her from a staff meeting; management humiliated her, blamed her from not following up on ordering treatment mats and accused her of not doing her job, reprimanded her, and issued her a performance rating of “Fully Successful” “with Concerns;” and a peer reviewed Complainant’s time card. After an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing. The assigned EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) held a hearing and issued a decision concluding the evidence of record did not establish any discrimination, hostile work environment, or unlawful reprisal. The AJ noted that Complainant “has not presented any evidence whatsoever that the claims in this matter occurred because of her sex, race, or disability. She has offered no evidence that male, non-black, or non- disabled employees were treated better with respect to inclusion in meetings, assignment to work committees, requests for staffing, workspace, or supplies, disciplinary action, or any of the issues in the accepted claims.” Thereafter, the Agency issued a final order implementing the AJ’s decision. Complainant appealed. In EEOC Appeal No. 2020001356, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final order implementing the AJ’s finding of no discrimination, hostile work environment, or reprisal. In the instant request for reconsideration, we have carefully reviewed Complainant’s arguments and determine that the matters either were raised or could have been raised below. We note that during the original appeal from the Agency’s final order, Complainant presented a number of arguments, many of which have been replicated in the instant request. 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. 2021004542 3 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. 2020000952 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. 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 19, 2022 Date