[Redacted], Monroe A., 1 Complainant,v.Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 4, 2023

Appeal No. 2021003310 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 4, 2023)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Monroe A.,1 Complainant, v. Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency. Request No. 2022004783 Appeal No. 2021003310 Agency No. PHI-20-0390-SSA DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2021003310 (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). During the period at issue, Complainant worked as a Benefits Authorizer at the Agency’s Mid- Atlantic Payment Service Center (MAPSC) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. On May 12, 2020, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging: 1. On January 13 and February 14, 2020, the Agency subjected Complainant to Weingarten meetings in unlawful retaliation against him for engaging in prior protected EEO activity. 2. From February 2018 until June 2020, Complainant was subjected to ongoing harassment based on his race (African American), sex (male), and in reprisal for prior EEO activity (EEOC Appeal No. 2021003312) when he was subjected to a 5-day suspension in 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. 2022004783 2 February 2018, a 14-day suspension in March/April 2019, and Weingarten meetings in 2018 where he was accused of selling marijuana on Agency property and another in early 2019 where he was accused of hanging up on SSA customers. Following an investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of his right to request a hearing before an Administrative Judge (AJ). When Complainant did not request a hearing within the time frame provided in 29 C.F.R. § 1614.108(f), the Agency issued a final decision pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b), finding no discrimination or unlawful retaliation. Complainant appealed. In EEOC Appeal No. 2021003310, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination or unlawful retaliation. The instant request for reconsideration followed. In his request, Complainant reargues the merits of his claim of discrimination and retaliation. In the instant request for reconsideration, nothing that Complainant has submitted supports a determination that the prior decision affirming the Agency’s final decision 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. 2021003310 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. 2022004783 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