[Redacted], Everett C., 1 Complainant,v.Ryan D. McCarthy, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Nov 9, 2020

Appeal No. 2019003546 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 9, 2020)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Everett C.,1 Complainant, v. Ryan D. McCarthy, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency. Request No. 2020002920 Appeal No. 2019003546 Hearing No. 570-2017-01435X Agency No. ARASC16JUN02170 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2019003546 (November 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). Complainant worked as a Property Book Officer at the Agency’s 160th Signal Brigade in Camp Artifjan, Kuwait. Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging discrimination on the basis of sex when: 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. 2020002920 2 1. On Match 1, 2016, after a verbal disagreement between Complainant and a junior coworker, the Chief did not provide him any support and presented a false statement to the Command and Military Police Investigator in support of allegations made by the coworker; 2. On March 10, 2016, the Colonel imposed a Bar to Installation, barring Complainant access to Bagram Airfield, and denying access to his place of employment; 3. On March 17, 2016, the Colonel disapproved Complainant’s request for reconsideration and maintained the Bar to Installation; and 4. On March 24, 2016, due to the Colonel’s actions against Complainant, Complainant was not able to fulfill the requirements, duties, and responsibilities inherent in the position for which he was hired as a Supervisory Logistics Management Specialist, therefore Complainant was terminated. The Agency accepted the complaint and conducted an investigation. Thereafter, Complainant requested a hearing. The EEOC Administrative Judge issued a decision dismissing the complaint on procedural grounds, finding Complainant’s initial EEO counselor contact of June 9, 2016, was untimely and noting the Complainant was properly informed of his EEO rights with relevant deadlines in the letter of termination. The Agency subsequently adopted the AJ’s dismissal decision. Our prior decision affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, finding that Complainant did not provide any persuasive arguments for tolling the 45-day time frame. In his request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses his disagreement with the prior decision. He argues it was not fair as he did not have counsel and requests an attorney. Complainant would have been responsible for hiring an attorney if he so desired, as we do not provide legal counsel. 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. 2019003546 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. 2020002920 3 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 November 9, 2020 Date