Ayanna B.,1 Complainant,v.Ryan K. Zinke, Secretary, Department of the Interior (National Park Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Apr 12, 2018

0520180093 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 12, 2018)

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

Ayanna B.,1
Complainant,

v.

Ryan K. Zinke,
Secretary,
Department of the Interior
(National Park Service),
Agency.

Request No. 0520180093

Appeal No. 0120172790

Agency No. NPS-17-0237

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120172790 (October 20, 2017).
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).

In her underlying complaint, Complainant claimed that she was discriminated against on the
bases of her sex (female) and age (59) when:

1. On March 25, 2015, Complainant received a Letter of Reprimand for requesting
overtime for a meeting with her supervisor;

2. In early 2016, Complainant received a Letter of Counseling for being two minutes
late on two occasions; and

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.
0520180093

2

3. On January 13, 2017, Complainant’s supervisor failed to inform her about a one week
Facility Management Software System training.

The Agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2) on the grounds that
Complainant failed to file her formal complaint in a timely manner. The Agency determined that
Complainant received a Notice of Right to File Individual Complaint on May 1, 2017, but did
not file her complaint until May 22, 2017, after the expiration of the fifteen-day filing period.
The Agency stated that Complainant provided no information pertaining to circumstances which
would warrant tolling, waiver, or estoppel of the time limitation.

On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal of the complaint. The Commission
found that the Agency demonstrated that Complainant filed her complaint in an untimely
manner. The Commission further found that Complainant’s argument that she was under
workplace stress and therefore forgot to file her complaint in a timely fashion was inadequate to
justify an extension of the fifteen-day filing period.

In her request for reconsideration, Complainant contends at the beginning of her argument that
she filed a timely complaint, but she subsequently acknowledges that the complaint was filed
with the Agency after the expiration of the fifteen-day filing period.

We find that Complainant’s request for reconsideration fails to show that our previous decision
involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or would have a substantial
impact on the policies, practices or operations of the Agency. We note that a request for
reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. 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. (Aug. 5, 2015). We find that Complainant’s argument
concerning the timeliness of her formal complaint lacks merit. The record establishes that
Complainant received a Notice of Right to File Individual Complaint on May 1, 2017.
Complainant did not file her complaint until May 22, 2017, after the expiration of the fifteen-day
filing period. We find that Complainant has not presented sufficient argument or evidence to
justify an extension of the filing period.

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. 0120172790 remains the
Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the
Commission on this request.

0520180093

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

April 12, 2018
Date