[Redacted], Diane G., 1 Complainant,v.Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Headquarters), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

May 25, 2021

Appeal No. 2020000007 (E.E.O.C. May. 25, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Diane G.,1 Complainant, v. Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Headquarters), Agency. Request No. 2021002332 Appeal No. 2020000007 Agency No. HS-HQ-00121-2018 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020000007 (February 25, 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). Complainant was employed as a Supervisory Law Enforcement Specialist (Area Commander), GS-1801-13, with the Federal Protective Service in Chicago, Illinois. Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging she was discriminated against and subject to a hostile work environment on the basis of sex (female) when: 1. On October 13, 2017, the District Commander (DC): a. Issued Complainant a memorandum for Failure to Satisfactorily Complete Probationary Period for Supervisory 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. 2021002332 2 b. Issued Complainant an adverse rating on her Employee Performance Plan and Appraisal Form; and c. Provided feedback and training opportunities to males, excluding Complainant from such training and feedback. 2. On February 15, 2018, Complainant received a job offer rescission letter from the National Program Protective Directorate Office of Infrastructure Protection rescinding an accepted and confirmed job offer. Complainant requested a hearing but the EEOC Administrative Judge granted the Agency’s motion to dismiss the request because the request was untimely made. Our prior appellate decision affirmed the Agency’s final decision that concluded that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged. The decision noted Complainant’s arguments regarding her request for a hearing and found that there was insufficient evidence to show she was so incapacitated that she could not request a hearing. The decision also found that Complainant did not show she was subjected to a discriminatory hostile work environment or that the Agency’s reasons for its actions were a pretext for discrimination. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the previous decision, and continues to argue that she was medically unable to timely request a hearing. She submits numerous emails that she sent and received during the relevant time period, which shows she was not so incapacitated that she could not request a hearing We emphasize that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. See EEO MD-110, Ch. 9, § VII.A. 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. 2020000007 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. 2021002332 3 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 May 25, 2021 Date