[Redacted], Nerissa S, 1 Complainant,v.Janet L. Yellen, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Nov 22, 2021

Appeal No. 2020001022 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 22, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Nerissa S,1 Complainant, v. Janet L. Yellen, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service), Agency. Request No. 2021004018 Appeal No. 2020001022 Hearing No. 570-2018-00105X Agency No. IRS-17-0100 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020001022 (June 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). On January 31, 2017, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the basis of race (African-American) when, on September 14 2016, she learned that her Candidate Development Program (CDP) application was not submitted to Executive Services, which prevented her from becoming a Senior Executive. 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. 2021004018 2 The Agency accepted the complaint and conducted an investigation, following which Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Over Complainant’s objections, the AJ granted the Agency’s motion for a decision by summary judgment and issued a decision finding no discrimination. The Agency adopted the AJ’s decision and Complainant appealed to the Commission. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s decision. Complainant asks that we reconsider her complaint, arguing that there are numerous disputed issues of material fact which preclude a decision without a hearing and that “bias in light of the finding” has a substantial impact on operations of the Agency. We note that in our prior decision, we considered Complainant’s argument that there were genuine disputes of material facts, including regarding the lack of communication and the role of Complainant’s first-line supervisor, the formulation of the claims, the Agency’s stated need for an executive in Washington, D.C., the impetus for relocation, Complainant’s commitment to the position, and the National Taxpayer Advocate’s withdrawal of support. We also note that in our prior decision, we considered Complainant’s allegations of bias and found there was no evidence that Complainant did not receive a fair evaluation of her case. We remind Complainant that 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) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) 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. 2020001022 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. 2021004018 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 November 22, 2021 Date