[Redacted], Mario H., 1 Complainant,v.Lloyd J. Austin III, Secretary, Department of Defense (Office of the Secretary of Defense), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jun 7, 2021

Appeal No. 2020003461 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 7, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Mario H.,1 Complainant, v. Lloyd J. Austin III, Secretary, Department of Defense (Office of the Secretary of Defense), Agency. Request No. 2021002573 Appeal No. 2020003461 Hearing No. 570-2019-01102X Agency No. 2018-WHSPFPA-074 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020003461 (March 23, 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 Police Officer at the Pentagon. Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging he was discriminated against on the bases of disability and reprisal when: 1. On May 18, 2018, a Deputy Chief denied Complainant’s reasonable accommodation request for a job reassignment or to not be placed at Boundary Channel; 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. 2021002573 2 2. On May 18, 2018, a Captain informed Complainant she was charging him with being absent without leave (AWOL) for failing to arrive at an assigned post, and as a result, he was contacted by a Lieutenant to participate in a Report of Inquiry; 3. On July 10, 2018, a Captain reassigned Complainant to First Platoon (day shift) for missing his medical appointment; and 4. On August 1, 2018, a Sergeant threatened to charge Complainant AWOL until he submitted medical documentation supporting his requests for unscheduled leave on July 19, 23, 24, and 27, 2018. Our prior appellate decision affirmed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge’s (AJ) decision by summary judgment which found in favor of the Agency, concluding Complainant failed to prove his discrimination claims. In the notice of intent to issue summary judgement, the AJ explained that the responsible Agency officials articulated legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for the disputed actions, that Complainant’s assertions that the Agency’s intentions and motivations were questionable were insufficient, and that he needed some evidence to raise an inference that the Agency’s actions were based on his disability or EEO activity, Thereafter, the AJ found no discrimination, adopting the notice of intent. In his request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses his disagreement with the previous decision. He presents many of the same arguments and information that he offered during the original appeal. 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. 2020003461 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. 2021002573 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 June 7, 2021 Date