Shellie T.,1 Complainant,v.Steven T. Mnuchin, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sep 18, 2019

2019004188 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 18, 2019)

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

Shellie T.,1
Complainant,

v.

Steven T. Mnuchin,
Secretary,
Department of the Treasury
(Internal Revenue Service),
Agency.

Request No. 2019004188

Appeal No. 0120180918

Hearing No. 550-2016-00336X

Agency No. IRS-15-1445-F

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120180918 (Apr. 30, 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, a Wage and Investment Division Contact Representative, filed an EEO complaint in
which she alleged that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African-
American), sex (female), age (58), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when, effective
April 17, 2015, she was terminated from her probationary position.

Complainant appealed her termination with the Merit Systems Protection Board, which dismissed
the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

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.
2019004188

2
Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ). The AJ assigned to the matter remanded the matter for a final agency decision
following Complainant’s failure to comply with his order. The Agency subsequently issued a final
decision finding no discrimination or reprisal.

On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision. We found that even if
Complainant had established a prima facie case of discrimination on any of the alleged bases, the
Agency had articulated legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for the probationary termination.
Namely, Complainant had failed to meet the standards for continued employment based on the
critical job elements, certification guidelines, the observations of her supervisor, and her
demonstrated inability to answer tax questions properly. Ultimately, we found that Complainant
failed to prove that the Agency’s explanation for the termination was a pretext for discrimination
or reprisal.

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), at 9-18
(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. She has not presented any argument or evidence tending to establish the existence
of either reconsideration criterion. She merely reargues her appeal on the merits, raising the same
contentions that we rejected in our previous decision.

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. 0120180918 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.

2019004188

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 18, 2019
Date