Joan M.,1 Complainant,v.Dr. Mark T. Esper, Acting Secretary, Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sep 18, 2019

2019003161 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 18, 2019)

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

Joan M.,1
Complainant,

v.

Dr. Mark T. Esper,
Acting Secretary,
Department of Defense
(Defense Contract Management Agency),
Agency.

Request No. 2019003161

Appeal No. 2019000060

Agency No. P8-18-0006

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Joan M. v. Dep’t of Def., EEOC Appeal No. 2019000060
(Mar. 27, 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, a GS-0801-12 General Engineer at the Agency's
Western Regional Command in Sunnyvale, California, alleged discrimination based on race
(Afghani), national origin (Afghanistan), religion (Islam), and in reprisal (prior protected EEO
activity) when: (1) on August 14, 2017, the Defense Contract Management Agency - Lockheed
Martin (DCMA LM) Commander verbally placed Complainant on administrative leave; (2) on
January 6, 2018, the DCMA LM Deputy Commander issued Complainant a Decision on Notice
of Proposed Indefinite Suspension and placed Complainant on a non-pay status effective January
8, 2018; (3) on February 16, 2018 the DCMA Western Regional Deputy Commander denied

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.
2019003161

2
Complainant’s request for restoration of his annual leave, “Use-or-Lose” leave, and time-off
awards; and (4) on November 1, 2017, Complainant’s first-line supervisor treated him differently
than others when he cleaned out Complainant’s office and removed Complainant’s personal items.

Following an investigation, Complainant requested a final agency decision. In the decision, the
Agency found that Complainant had not been subjected to discrimination as alleged. Our previous
decision affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding that Complainant failed to establish that the
Agency’s articulated, non-discriminatory/retaliatory explanations for its employment actions were
a pretext or otherwise motivated by discriminatory or retaliatory animus.

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. 2019000060 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.
2019003161

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

September 18, 2019
Date