[Redacted], Opal V., 1 Complainant,v.Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs (Veterans Health Administration), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Feb 15, 2022

Appeal No. 2021001246 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 15, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Opal V.,1 Complainant, v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs (Veterans Health Administration), Agency. Appeal No. 2021001246 Hearing No. 510-2017-00291X Agency No. 200I-0516-2016104230 DECISION Complainant filed a timely appeal, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403, from the Agency’s [insert date] final order concerning an equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint claiming employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. During the period at issue, Complainant was employed as a Medical Records Technician in the Release of Information Department at the C.W. Bill Young Medical Center of Bay Pines, Florida. Complainant filed an formal EEO complaint alleging discrimination by the Agency on the basis of race, disability and in reprisal for prior EEO-protected activity when: 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. 2 2021001246 1. In May 2015, the business office chief refused to accommodate Complainant by assigning Complainant to a vacant office in Release of Information department. 2. On October 5, 2015, Complainant was denied computer access. 3. On January 25, 2016, a co-worker (CW) accused Complainant of pushing her against the wall and reported the incident to VA police. An Agency police officer and police lieutenant twisted Complainant's arm, slammed the telephone down and refused to allow Complainant to contact her psychologist. She was handcuffed Complainant and arrested her for assault and resisting arrest; 4. On February 17, 2016, the business office chief notified Complainant that a fact-finding investigation was being conducted regarding the incident on January 25, 2016. 5. On February 17, 2016, the business office chief failed to ask Complainant to write a report of contact regarding the incident on January 25, 2016. 6. On February 17, 2016, the business office chief informed Complainant that she was to have no contact with staff Release of Information until further notice. 7. On March 24, 2016, a coworker (CW) taunted Complainant by her facial expression and making grunting sounds when CW delivered a UPS package to Complainant's office. 8. On April 21, 2016, the business office chief issued Complainant a memorandum informing her that the investigation was completed and there may be disciplinary action taken. 9. On April 21, 2016 and May 3, 2016, the business office chief denied Complainant a copy of the fact-finding investigation report. 10. From July 1, 2016 to July 6, 2016, the business office chief continuously asked Complainant about a report she had already submitted. 11. As of July 5, 2016, Complainant's request for reasonable accommodation had no Agency response. 3 2021001246 12. On August 3, 2016, the business office chief continued to improperly scrutinize and criticize Complainant's work. 13. On October 13, 2016, the business office chief issued Complainant a proposed 14-day suspension which was sustained on or about May 2, 2017. 14. On October 17, 2016, the business office chief withdrew Complainant's request for a reasonable accommodation without Complainant's permission and knowledge. 15. On October 17, 2016, Complainant was denied a permanent reasonable accommodation. 16. On October 17, 2016, Complainant was reassigned to Release of Information. After its investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing. The AJ held a hearing and subsequently issued a decision in favor of the Agency. The Agency issued its final order adopting the AJ’s conclusion that Complainant failed to prove discrimination as alleged. The instant appeal followed. Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by an AJ will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence is defined as “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474, 477 (1951) (citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not discriminatory intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982). An AJ's conclusions of law are subject to a de novo standard of review, whether or not a hearing was held. An AJ’s credibility determination based on the demeanor of a witness or on the tone of voice of a witness will be accepted unless documents or other objective evidence so contradicts the testimony or the testimony so lacks in credibility that a reasonable fact finder would not credit it. EEOC Management Directive 110 at Ch. 9 § VI.B. (Aug. 5, 2015). Upon careful review of the AJ’s decision and the evidence of record, as well as the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that substantial evidence of record supports the AJ’s determination that Complainant has not proven discrimination by the Agency as alleged. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order adopting the AJ’s decision. 4 2021001246 STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0920) The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or evidence that tend to establish 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. Requests for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. If the party requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for reconsideration. A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). Complainant should submit his or her request for reconsideration, and any statement or brief in support of his or her request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx Alternatively, Complainant can submit his or her request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFO receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of service on the other party, unless Complainant files his or her request via the EEOC Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required. Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted together with the request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(c). 5 2021001246 COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0610) 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. If you file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint. 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 February 15, 2022 Date