[Redacted], Joni M., 1 Complainant,v.Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Dec 27, 2021

Appeal No. 2020000967 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 27, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Joni M.,1 Complainant, v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency. Request Nos. 2021004762; 2021004767 Appeal Nos. 2020000967; 2020000968 Hearing Nos. 420-2017-00055X; 420-2016-00112X Agency Nos. 2003-0586-2015103101; 2003-0586-2015104513 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Joni M. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal Nos. 2020000967, 2020000968 (July 7, 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, a Nurse Practitioner in Surgical Service at the Agency's VA Medical Center in Jackson, Mississippi, filed two formal EEO complaints (Agency Nos. 2003-0586-2015103101 and 2003-0586-2015104513) alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the bases of race (African American), sex (female), age (46 years), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity as evidenced by numerous incidents occurring between November 2014 and October 2016. 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. 2021004762, 2021004767 2 Following investigations, Complainant requested hearings before an EEOC Administrative Judge. The AJ assigned to the matters issued separate summary judgment decisions finding that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination, reprisal, or a hostile work environment as alleged. The Agency subsequently issued final orders fully adopting the AJ’s decisions. In the consolidated appellate decision, the Commission affirmed the final orders. The Commission concluded that the alleged actions were undoubtedly unpleasant for Complainant; however, there was no evidence that the alleged conduct was based on discriminatory or retaliatory animus. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the totality of the conduct alleged was insufficiently severe or pervasive so as to alter the terms and conditions of her employment. Accordingly, the Commission found that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination, reprisal, or a hostile work environment. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the previous decision and reiterates arguments previously made on appeal. The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. 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. Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission's decision. 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 Nos. 2020000967, 2021004767 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. 2021004762, 2021004767 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 December 27, 2021 Date