[Redacted], Saran R., 1 Complainant,v.Gary Gensler, Chair, Securities and Exchange Commission, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 6, 2022

Appeal No. 2020004132 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 6, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Saran R.,1 Complainant, v. Gary Gensler, Chair, Securities and Exchange Commission, Agency. Request No. 2021004756 Appeal No. 2020004132 Agency No. 00032-2018 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020004132 (August 3, 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). During the relevant time, Complainant was employed by the Agency as a Financial Management Specialist in Washington, D.C. On or about November 8, 2019, Complainant filed a formal complaint claiming discrimination based on race, sex, age, and in reprisal for prior protected activity. 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 2021004756 Specifically, Complainant claimed that her work assignments and responsibilities were frequently changed, reduced, or were the same duties assigned to contactors; her Branch Chief informed her that she was to report to him, rather than to the team lead; her work has been micromanaged; she was not promoted or was denied several jobs; she was reprimanded by being directed to take unpaid leave for work-related activity; she received emails from her Branch Chief to make her appear incompetent; on an alternative work schedule day, her Branch Chief emailed her, directing her to provide a copy of an OIT helpdesk ticket to shoe her problem with logging in, or otherwise to take leave if she could not perform work that day; her Branch Chief made belittling comments to her; during a mid-year review, the Branch Chief told her that creating new work for her would be a “waste of taxpayer money;” during a mid-year review, the Branch Chief told her that her office had no rotation policy and that she should apply for details or voluntary reassignment; her Branch Chief disregarded her medical need to use ad hoc telework when he suggested that she take leave when she did not report to the office; her Branch Chief issued her a progress report for performance deficiencies; she received a reprimand by directing her to take unpaid leave; and her Branch Chief changed file review procedures for the staff. Following an investigation, Complainant did not respond to either a notice of a right to a hearing, or a decision by the Agency. The Agency thereafter issued a final decision, finding no discrimination on all claims. On appeal, in EEOC Appeal No. 2020004132, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. In the instant request for reconsideration, we have carefully reviewed Complainant’s argument and determine that the argument constitutes, in essence, a reiteration of the arguments raised by Complainant on appeal from the Agency’s final decision. We note that in this original appeal of the Agency’s final decision, Complainant provided detailed arguments relating to each of the subject claims. Her submissions on the instant request are basically a replication of those prior arguments. We emphasize 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), 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. 2020004132 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 3 2021004756 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. 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 6, 2022 Date