[Redacted], Mary L., 1 Complainant,v.Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Coast Guard), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jun 14, 2021

Appeal No. 2020002439 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 14, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Mary L.,1 Complainant, v. Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Coast Guard), Agency. Request No. 2021002750 Appeal No. 2020002439 Hearing No. 430-2018-00333X Agency No. HS-USCG-02498-2017 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020002439 (March 11, 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 Human Resources Manager at the Agency’s Community Services Command in Chesapeake, Virginia. Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging she was subjected to discrimination on the bases of race (Black) and reprisal when: (1) from September 19, 2017 and ongoing, she was subjected to harassment which included initiating a hostile work environment investigation against her and the removal of personnel from under her 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. 2021002750 2 supervision; and (2) on November 15, 2017, management removed Complainant from her position as HR Manager. Our prior appellate decision affirmed the EEOC Administrative Judge’s (AJ) decision by summary judgment which found in favor of the Agency, concluding Complainant failed to prove her discrimination claims. In his decision, the AJ noted that one of Complainant’s subordinates complained that Complainant was creating a hostile work environment and Agency management conducted an investigation into the allegations. Complainant did not show the Agency’s reasons for the investigation were a pretext for discrimination or unlawful retaliation in violation of Title VII. The AJ also found that when the Agency’s investigation substantiated the hostile work allegations made by the subordinate, Complainant was terminated. The AJ further found that Complainant failed to produce evidence that the Agency’s reasons for its actions were a pretext for discrimination or retaliatory animus. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the previous decision and makes many of the same arguments she raised 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. 2020002439 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. 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. 2021002750 3 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 14, 2021 Date