Alton F.,1 Complainant,v.Steven T. Mnuchin, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sep 17, 2019

2019003050 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 17, 2019)

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

Alton F.,1
Complainant,

v.

Steven T. Mnuchin,
Secretary,
Department of the Treasury
(Office of the Comptroller of the Currency),
Agency.

Request No. 2019003050

Appeal No. 2019001369

Agency No. OCC-18-0691-F

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Alton F. v. Dep’t of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No.
2019001369 (Mar. 19, 2019). 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).

In the underlying complaint, Complainant alleged discrimination based on age (over 40) when: (1)
on February 23, 2018, his manager told him he needed to cancel his Continuing Education (CE)
training because it involved travel; and (2) on June 5, 2018, his manager criticized him for using a
“bold” font in an email to a coworker, and then informed him that he considers him to be working
at a level one performance. Complainant also raised additional claims and events that occurred
between 2015 and 2017 in his informal counseling.

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.
2019003050

2
The Agency dismissed the complaint in its entirety. The Agency dismissed Claim 1 as untimely
raised with an EEO Counselor and Claim 2 for failure to state a claim. Further, the Agency noted
that the matters alleged that occurred between 2015 and 2017 were raised in a previous complaint
and were otherwise untimely raised with an EEO Counselor.

On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal. Specifically, we determined that
Claim 1 was properly dismissed as untimely raised with an EEO Counselor as the alleged
discriminatory act occurred more than 45 days beyond the limitation period. We also agreed with
the Agency that the alleged comment(s) in Claim 2 did not render Complainant an “aggrieved”
employee and, therefore, failed to state a claim. Lastly, we agreed with the Agency that the
allegations pertaining to matters occurring between 2015 and 2017 were previously raised, in
Agency No. OCC-17-0028-F. Alternatively, we also found such allegations to be untimely raised
with an EEO Counselor.

In his reconsideration request, Complainant expresses his disagreement with the appellate decision
and reiterates many arguments previously made on appeal. The Commission emphasizes that a
request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. 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. 2019001369 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.

2019003050

3
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

September 17, 2019
Date