[Redacted], Carter R., 1 Complainant,v.Antony Blinken, Secretary, Department of State, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Oct 20, 2021

Appeal No. 2020003120 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 20, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Carter R.,1 Complainant, v. Antony Blinken, Secretary, Department of State, Agency. Request No. 2021003913 Appeal No. 2020003120 Agency No. DOS-0201-19 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Carter R. v. Department of State, EEOC Appeal No. 2020003120 (May 25, 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 a Mechanical Engineer for the Agency in Rosslyn, Virginia. On April 8, 2019, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming that the Agency discriminated against him based on sex, religion, age, and in reprisal for prior protected activity when he was subjected to a hostile work environment characterized by, but not limited to, slurs, insults, and other inappropriate comments and behaviors. 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. 3 2021003913 Following an investigation into the complaint, Complainant requested that the Agency issue a final decision. On March 4, 2020, the Agency issued a final decision finding no discrimination. The prior appellate decision affirmed the Agency’s final decision. Specifically, the prior decision determined that Complainant simply had not shown that he was subjected to a hostile work environment and his claims lacked specificity. The prior decision expressly noted that Complainant determined that he was subjected to discrimination because he was the oldest and most experienced civil servant. However, the prior decision determined that Complainant’s assertion was mere conjecture. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant, through counsel, submits a brief expressing disagreement with the appellate decision. However, the arguments raised were either previously made, or could have been made below. We note that the prior decision expressly rejected a number of documents submitted by Complainant because Complainant offered no explanation why they were introduced for the first time on appeal rather than during the investigation of the complaint or at a hearing where relevance and veracity could be tested. 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 decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020003120 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. 4 2021003913 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 October 20, 2021 Date