[Redacted], Maryanne S., 1 Complainant,v.Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 27, 2023

Appeal No. 2021002519 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 27, 2023)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Maryanne S.,1 Complainant, v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency. Request No. 2022004979 Appeal No. 2021002519 Hearing No. 460-2018-00250X Agency No. 2003-0580-2017104012 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Maryanne S. v. Department of Veterans Affairs EEOC Appeal No. 2021002519 (August 22, 2022). 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). On October 10, 2017, Complainant filed an EEO complaint, which she subsequently amended, alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (Black), sex (female), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: 1. On July 3, 2017, the Chief of Staff issued Complainant a seven-day suspension. 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. 2022004979 2 2. On September 3, 2017, Complainant’s coworker (Tech-1) screamed at Complainant, accusing her of smearing blood on the scanner. 3. On October 6, 2017, the Business Manager screamed at Complainant, saying, “Where is the patient…we are doing a fact-finding now.” 4. On December 1, 2017, Complainant’s supervisor issued Complainant a lower than expected annual performance rating of Fully Successful. 5. On December 10, 2017, Complainant became aware that Tech-1 asked the Lead Tech to allow Complainant to get off work 30 minutes early while Tech-1 was hiding in the CAT scan area and parking lot to attack Complainant. 6. On December 17, 2017, Tech-1 entered the CAT scan area looking at Complainant and spoke in a loud voice, “Where is the police?” 7. On February 3, 2018, Tech-1 accused Complainant of leaving a harmful liquid to splash on her. 8. On March 19, 2018, Complainant was issued a 14-day suspension. Our prior appellate decision affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. Specifically, we determined Complainant did not show by a preponderance of evidence that she was subjected to disparate treatment or harassment based on any of her protected classes. In her request, Complainant provides no evidence to warrant granting her request. The Commission emphasizes 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) (Aug. 5, 2015), at 9-18; 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. 2021002519 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 2022004979 3 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. 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 March 27, 2023 Date