[Redacted], Christopher E., 1 Complainant,v.Charles Wormuth, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Nov 4, 2021

Appeal No. 2020002845 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 4, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Christopher E.,1 Complainant, v. Charles Wormuth, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency. Request No. 2021002715 Appeal No. 2020002845 Agency Nos. ARIMPC18JUN02813, ASRYONGSAN16MAY02111 Hearing Nos. 480-2019-00276X, 480-2019-00571X DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Christopher E. v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 2020002845 (March 16, 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, Complaint was employed by the Agency as a Supervisor Strategic Planning Specialist in Yongsan, South Korea. Complainant filed the two EEO complaints on July 6, 2016 and on July 19, 2018, respectively. Therein, Complainant claimed discrimination based on race, color, and in reprisal for prior protected activity when he was accused of a prohibited personnel practice; his office position 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. 2 2021002715 description was not updated and an Agency Director became unresponsive to work related assignments; the Director berated and slandered him; the Director attempted to impose his culture on him; the Director accused him and his staff of personally attacking him; and he became aware that an Agency Colonel provide him a Commander’s Award for Civilian Service, as his Permanent Change of Station award. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The two captioned complaints were consolidated, and the AJ issued a decision by summary judgment, finding no discrimination was established. The Agency issued a final order adopting the AJ’s finding of no discrimination. Complainant filed an appeal with the Commission, providing a lengthy and detailed appellate brief. In EEOC Appeal No. 2020002845, we affirmed the Agency’s final order which had adopted the AJ’s decision. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant has provided a detailed argument which addresses matters which were raised, or could have been raised, below. As noted above, in the original appeal, Complainant had submitted an extensive brief from the Agency’s final order which replicates arguments presently raised. 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. 2020002845 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. 3 2021002715 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 November 4, 2021 Date