Colby S.,1 Complainant,v.Rex W. Tillerson, Secretary, Department of State, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 5, 2018

0520170616 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 5, 2018)

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

Colby S.,1
Complainant,

v.

Rex W. Tillerson,
Secretary,
Department of State,
Agency.

Request No. 0520170616

Appeal No. 0120170049

Hearing No. 570-2013-00385X

Agency No. DOS-F-086-12

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120170049 (August 16, 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).

Complainant filed a complaint in which he alleged that on April 2, 2012, he received a $13,000
reduction in salary because of his age (78) and previous EEO activity. The Agency investigated
the complaint and Complainant requested a hearing with an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ).
The AJ issued a decision on summary judgment finding in the Agency’s favor. The AJ found
that while there may have been a breach of an oral agreement that resulted in Complainant’s

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.
0520170616

2
salary reduction, this was unrelated to the questions of discrimination or reprisal. The Agency
issued an order implementing the AJ’s decision and the previous appellate decision affirmed.

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), at 9-18 (August 5, 2015); see, e.g., Lopez v. Department of Agriculture, EEOC
Request No. 0520070736 (August 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. He has not presented any argument or evidence
tending to establish the existence of either reconsideration criterion. He merely contests the
merits of the AJ’s determination that no genuine issue of material fact existed with respect to the
existence of an unlawful motive at the root of his salary reduction

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. 0120170049 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 (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).

0520170616

3

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

March 5, 2018
Date