U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Adell W.,1 Complainant, v. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services), Agency. Request No. 2021002862 Appeal No. 2020001809 Hearing No. 410-2019-00304X Agency No. APHIS-2018-00227 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Adell W. v. United States Department of Agriculture, EEOC Appeal No. 2020001809 (March 17, 2021). 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). During the relevant time, Complainant was employed by the Agency as an Animal Care Technician, at the Agency’s Professional Development Center, National Detector Dog Training Center in Newman, Georgia. 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. 3 2021002862 On January 22, 2018, Complainant filed a formal complaint claiming unlawful employment discrimination based on disability and in reprisal for prior protected activity. Complainant alleged that management denied a request to change time and attendance, to reflect time spent filing an EEO complaint; management instructed her to return to work without a reasonable accommodation, after management officials shared private medication documentation with other officials and co-workers; and she was harassed including being given false information regarding reassignment options, failure to respond to various requests for information on time and attendance reports, or status updates on her disability case. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ subsequently issued a decision by summary judgment, finding no discrimination. The Agency issued a final order adopting the AJ’s finding of no discrimination. Complainant appealed and the prior appellate decision affirmed the Agency’s final order. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant states that she had recently “found important emails” in support of her discrimination claims and submits copies of the emails. First, we do not find that the substance of these emails merit granting Complainant’s reconsideration request. Significantly, we note that the emails were transmitted several years prior to the issuance of the prior decision, and could have been previously addressed. Finally, we note that Complainant provided numerous submissions on appeal from the Agency’s final order, which are again repetitive of matters addressed in the instant request. We emphasize 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), Chap. 9 § VI.A (Aug. 5, 2015); see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 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. 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. 2020001809 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. 4 2021002862 “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 July 12, 2021 Date
