[Redacted], Tommie R., 1 Complainant,v.Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary, Department of Agriculture (Forest Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Oct 5, 2021

Appeal No. 2020000829 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 5, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Tommie R.,1 Complainant, v. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary, Department of Agriculture (Forest Service), Agency. Request No. 2021003841 Appeal No. 2020000829 Agency Nos. FS-2019-00128, FS-2019-00128 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Tommie R. v. Dep’t of Agric., EEOC Appeal No. 2020000829 (May 25, 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 November 2, 2018, and March 5, 2019, Complainant filed his complaints alleging discrimination based on disability and in reprisal for prior EEO activity when: 1. On November 14, 2018, he was charged Absent Without Leave (AWOL); 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. 2021003841 2 2. On September 24, 2018, he was issued a Notice of Decision on Proposed Removal, effective October 6, 2018, subsequent to the Notice of Proposed Removal dated July 27, 2018; 3. On September 18, 2018, he learned his July-August leave was not approved; 4. On various occasions including August 29, 2018, management failed to approve his Leave Without Pay (LWOP) requests; 5. On an unspecified date, he was coerced to begin a disability retirement application in exchange for future approved leave; 6. On May 17, 2018, under the Family & Medical Leave Act (FMLA), his leave and future leave requests were not approved; 7. On several dates, he was subjected to various incidents of harassment, including but not limited to when from April 2018 to September 8, 2018, management failed to communicate with him directly; 8. On or about October 16, 2018, management denied him leave without pay (LWOP) status until his disability retirement, directed him to change his time and attendance subsequent to his termination, and refused to correct his timesheets, resulting in his final pay being withheld; and 9. On several dates, he was subjected to various incidents of harassment including, but not limited to, beginning September 1, 2018, management singled him out and failed to assign him under new supervision as done with other similarly situated employees. The Agency issued a decision finding that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected him to discrimination as alleged. Complainant appealed, and the Commission’s prior decision affirmed the Agency’s decision. In his request, Complainant provides no evidence to warrant granting his request. The Commission emphasizes 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) (Aug. 5, 2015), at 9-18; 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. 2021003841 3 The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020000829 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. 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 October 5, 2021 Date