[Redacted], Jeannie T., 1 Complainant,v.Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary, Department of Agriculture (Forest Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 4, 2023

Appeal No. 2021003268 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 4, 2023)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Jeannie T.,1 Complainant, v. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary, Department of Agriculture (Forest Service), Agency. Request No. 2022004832 Appeal No. 2021003268 Agency No. FS-2020-00967 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2021003268 (August 8, 2022). 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). At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant’s position of record was a GS- 0401-12 Natural Resources Planner at the Agency’s Spring Mountains National Recreation Area in Las Vegas, Nevada. From January 2017 to August 16, 2020, Complainant was detailed as a GS-0401-13 Litigation Coordinator in the Regional Office. Report of Investigation (ROI) at 141, 406-08. On November 12, 2020, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of disability (physical), age (born in April 1947), and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: 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. 2022004832 2 1. On August 14, 2020, management reassigned her to a clerical position located 500 miles away from her home, and, thereafter, management ignored her requests and refused to reassign her back to her permanent position; 2. On September 28, 2020, management assigned her clerical duties to perform, did not issue her a position description, and left her in a questionable duty station; and 3. On November 13, 2020, she learned that management hired two younger employees, hid Complainant’s planning duties from her, and reassigned them to these employees At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge (AJ). In accordance with Complainant’s request, the Agency issued a final decision pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b). The Agency determined that Complainant failed to establish her claims of discrimination or retaliation. Complainant appealed. In EEOC Appeal No. 2021003268, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination or unlawful retaliation. This request for reconsideration follows. In the instant request for reconsideration, nothing that Complainant has submitted supports a determination that the prior decision affirming the Agency final order was in error. 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. 2021003268 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. 2022004832 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 January 4, 2023 Date