0520120291
12-06-2012
Mildred Taylor, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Mildred Taylor,
Complainant,
v.
Eric K. Shinseki,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request No. 0520120291
Appeal No. 0120092702
Hearing No. 440-2008-00096X
Agency No. 200J-0556-2007102334
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Mildred Taylor v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120092702 (January 20, 2012). 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).
The previous decision affirmed the Agency's implementation of an Administrative Judge's (AJ) finding that Complainant had not established that she had been discriminated against in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when she was not given credit for a suggestion she had made (for which she believed another employee had received an award) and when she was not allowed to work overtime. The decision found that the AJ had properly issued a decision without a hearing, and found that, assuming Complainant had established a prima facie case of reprisal, the Agency had articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions which Complainant had not shown to be pretext.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant argued that the information she had previously submitted should have resulted in a finding in her favor. She also argued that the management officials at her workplace did not treat everyone in a fair and equal manner, and that the management officials created a lot of stress in those they supervised because of arbitrary decision-making. The Agency submitted a statement in opposition to Complainant's request for reconsideration in which it urged the Commission to affirm the previous decision.
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 that it 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. (Nov. 9, 1999). Complainant has not shown that the previous decision was erroneous in its conclusion that she had not established that the Agency's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions were pretext for reprisal discrimination. Complainant has not provided evidence that reprisal based on previous EEO activity motivated the alleged responsible management officials to deny her credit for her work-related suggestion or deny her the ability to work overtime.
Therefore, 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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to DENY the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120092702 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
December 6, 2012
Date
2
0520120291
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120291