0520090577
01-30-2012
Thomasina Sims, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Thomasina Sims,
Complainant,
v.
Eric K. Shinseki,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request No. 0520090577
Appeal No. 0120080407
Agency No. 200J-0556-2006101631
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Thomasina
Sims v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120080407 (June
12, 2009). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its
discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision
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(b).
In our previous decision, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s finding
of no discrimination. Specifically, the Commission found that Complainant
failed to establish that she was subjected to harassment based on her sex.
We further found that Complainant failed to establish that the alleged
events that occurred were sufficiently severe or pervasive to rise to the
level of harassment. We found that Complainant had not shown that the
alleged harassment affected a term, condition of employment and/or had the
purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with the work environment
and/or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant contends that the previous
decision “clearly involved erroneous interpretations of material
fact/law.” She argues that the Commission’s decision “will have
a substantial impact on the policies, practices and operations of the
[A]gency as future discrimination of women at this [A]gency could be
allowed to continue unchecked if the rule of law in this case is not
upheld.” She argues that the record evidence establishes that she was
subjected to harassment based on her sex. The Agency did not submit a
response to Complainant’s request for reconsideration.
In her request, Complainant is attempting to revisit the merits of
the previous decision. A request for reconsideration is not a second
form of appeal. E.g., Lopez v. Dep’t of Agriculture, EEOC Request
No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007); EEO Management Directive for Part 1614
(EEO MD-110), Chap. 9, §VII.A. (Nov. 9, 1999). A reconsideration
request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision
involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law;
or (2) will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or
operations of the Agency.
After reconsidering 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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to DENY
the request. Accordingly, the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120080407
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 (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot
afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that
the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also
permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other
security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
29 U.S.C. §§ 791, 794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within
the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney with
the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action.
Both the
request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits as
stated in the paragraph above (“Right to File a Civil Action”).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
January 30, 2012
Date
2
0520090577
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520090577