[Redacted], Sherrie M., 1 Complainant,v.Xavier Becerra, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jul 20, 2021

Appeal No. 2020001457 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 20, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Sherrie M.,1 Complainant, v. Xavier Becerra, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Agency. Request No. 2021002896 Appeal No. 2020001457 Hearing No. 570-2017-00573X Agency No. HHS-OS-0048-2015 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Sherrie M. v. Department of Health and Human Services, EEOC Appeal No. 2020001457 (March 16, 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 Telecommunications Specialist in the Agency’s Technology Management Branch (TMB), Division of Administrative Management, Office of the Chief Operation Officer, in Washington, D.C. 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 2021002896 On September 29, 2015, and subsequently amended, Complainant filed a formal complaint, claiming discrimination based on sex, age and in reprisal for prior protected activity. Specifically, Complainant alleged ongoing harassment on the raised bases, starting in 2010 and continuing to the present, when she was treated differently than other GS-15s when: her professional role and authority was marginalized; filling vacant positions in her Section were not approved; management dismissed positive feedback concerning Complainant; management did not support a continued detail request for temporary work at an alternative duty station; she received an improper assignment; she was denied a request for a modified telework alternate duty station; she was denied a request to work remotely outside of her official duty station; she was denied detail requests; she faced more restrictive reporting requirements than her male counterparts; management pursued more severe discipline against her than male counterparts; she failed to be considered for a Branch Chief role; her duties since a realignment have been loosely defined; a Division Chief denied her requests to meet; a proposed suspension was issued and then rescinded; she was charged three hours on Absent Without Leave; she was charged with one hour of Absent Without Leave on another occasion; and she was issued a suspension. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The Agency submitted a motion for summary judgment. The AJ thereafter issued a summary judgment decision finding no discrimination. The Agency issued a final order implement the AJ’s decision without a hearing finding no discrimination. Complainant appealed and the prior appellate decision affirmed the Agency’s final order. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant submits extensive statement relating to the alleged impropriety of the AJ’s determination to issue a decision by summary judgment. We note, however, that similar extensive arguments on this matter had been raised on appeal from the Agency’s final order and already addressed. 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. 2020001457 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 3 2021002896 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 July 20, 2021 Date