[Redacted], Tessa G., 1 Complainant,v.Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Aug 3, 2021

Appeal No. 2020000882 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 3, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Tessa G.,1 Complainant, v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation), Agency. Request No. 2021002910 Appeal No. 2020000882 Hearing No. 570-2015-00307X Agency No. FBI-2013-00261 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Tessa G. v. Dep’t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 2020000882 (Mar. 9, 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). Complainant, a GS-14 Management and Program Analyst at the Agency’s Headquarters in Washington, D.C., filed a formal EEO complaint alleging that that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African-American), sex (female), and reprisal for prior protected EEO 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. 2021002910 2 1. On August 22, 2013, she learned that her government laptop was to be audited for inappropriate activity; 2. On August 26, 2013, she was reassigned to another unit without justification by management; 3. On October l 8, 2013, her flexible schedule was discontinued; 4. In January 2014, some of her duties were removed and workload and responsibilities were decreased; 5. On January 23, 2014, she was counseled for violating a security policy; 6. On April 25, 2014, she was given a mid-year review that referenced her EEO complaint and was largely negative; 7. On April 29, 2014, she was provided written counseling about the use of leave; 8. On May 8, 2014, she was charged with Absence Without Leave for late arrivals; and 9. On May 22, 2014, she learned that an Inspection Division, Internal Investigation Section investigation was initiated regarding her leave reporting. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ assigned to the matter issued a summary judgment decision finding that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination or reprisal as alleged. The Agency issued a final order fully adopting the AJ’s decision. In the appellate decision, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final order. The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. 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. Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission's decision. 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. 2020000882 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. 2021002910 3 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 August 3, 2021 Date