0520120247
05-04-2012
Pamela Shaut, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Pamela Shaut,
Complainant,
v.
Eric K. Shinseki,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request No. 0520120247
Appeal No. 0120112394
Agency No. 200H05282011100902
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Pamela Shaut v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120112394 (December 21, 2011). 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).
On January 10, 2011, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination and harassment on the bases of race (Caucasian) and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when:
1. On unspecified dates she was "singled out" by the Foreman who began to "scrutinize her work" concerning job assignments; and
2. On unspecified dates prior to and after May 2010, the Service Chief yelled at her.
The Agency concluded that the complaint failed to state a claim. The previous decision affirmed the Agency's dismissal. According to the previous decision, the incidents alleged were isolated in nature and, even if proven true, would not be sufficiently severe to alter the conditions of her employment. Moreover, the alleged incidents were not of a type reasonably likely to deter Complainant or others from engaging in protected activity.
In her request for reconsideration,1 Complainant does not specifically address the previous decision's findings that, with regard to claims (1) and (2), she failed to state a claim because the incidents alleged were isolated in nature and, even if proven true, would not be sufficiently severe to alter the conditions of her employment; and that the alleged incidents were not of a type reasonably likely to deter Complainant or others from engaging in protected activity.
In its response to the request, the Agency argues that Complainant has not met the criteria for reconsideration.
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); Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17. 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 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. 0120112394 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
____5/4/12______________
Date
1In large part, Complainant's reconsideration request concerns the Agency's failure to allow her to laterally transfer to another facility away from a co-worker; the Service Chief treating her and her representative in a rude and disparaging manner; and the Service Chief's failure to provide Complainant's leave records which were requested as discovery in another EEO case.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0520120247
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120247