Solomon B.,1 Complainant,v.Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Feb 27, 2019

2019000756 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 27, 2019)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Solomon B.,1
Complainant,

v.

Kirstjen M. Nielsen,
Secretary,
Department of Homeland Security
(Transportation Security Administration),
Agency.

Request No. 2019000756

Appeal No. 0120161677

Hearing No. 430-2014-00282X & 430-2014-00335X

Agency No. HSTSA018252013 & HSTSA000702014

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120161677 (September 18, 2018).
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).

Complainant worked as a Lead Transportation Security Officer at the Agency’s Charlotte-
Douglas International Airport in Charlotte, North Carolina. Complainant filed two EEO
complaints alleging that he was subjected to unlawful retaliation for engaging in prior EEO
activity when: (1) on June 10, 2013, his manager allegedly informed him that the only way he
would be issued leave for a day was to accept Leave Without Pay; (2) on June 25, 2013, his
manager marked him absent without leave for 2.15 hours; (3) on June 25, 2013, his manager

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.
2019000756

2
issued him a letter of counseling; (4) on October 9 and 22, 2013, he was directed by a supervisor
to perform alarm audits; and (5) on October 23, 2013, his supervisor wrote a Memorandum for
the Record.

Our prior appellate decision affirmed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Administrative Judge’s (AJ) decision by summary judgment which found in favor of the Agency,
concluding Complainant failed to prove his reprisal claims.

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant makes the same arguments he made on appeal.
We emphasize that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. See
EEO MD-110, Ch. 9, § VII.A. 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. 0120161677 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.
2019000756

3
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

February 27, 2019
Date