[Redacted], Tyson L., 1 Complainant,v.Sonny Perdue, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 8, 2021

Appeal No. 2019005746 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 8, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Tyson L.,1 Complainant, v. Sonny Perdue, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency. Request No. 2021000427 Appeal No. 2019005746 Agency No. USDA-CRSD-CF-2016-00542 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2019005746 (September 24, 2020). 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 Civil Rights Program Specialist/Team Lead, GS-0301-14, in Washington D.C. On May 17, 2016, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint claiming discrimination and harassment by the Agency based on race, sex, national origin, and in reprisal for prior 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. 2021000427 2 1. In 2010, Complainant submitted a non-complaint letter to the Compliance Division that the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights had not fully complied with the Basu Class Action settlement;2 2. During a February 23, 2015 staff meeting in front of Complainant’s co-workers, his supervisor accused him of harassing, abusing and intimidating his employees; 3. Since February and ongoing, his supervisors undermined his GS-14 Team Lead position by giving lower level employees titles and did not address his concerns regarding an employee who consistently disrespected him; 4. From February 2015 and ongoing, his supervisor isolated him from projects with other staff members; 5. In or around February 2016, his supervisor directed him to complete projects that were initially started by lower level employees; 6. On or around March 2016, Complainant was threatened with insubordination by his supervisor, he was undermined by his supervisor when he was accused of saying something out of context and he was the only Team Lead who did not attend the weekly leadership staff meetings; 7. On or around March 22, 2016, Complainant believes his supervisors conspired against him to run him out of the office by sending him on a detail to Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA); 8. On March 22, 2016, Complainant’s concerns regarding the hostile work environment and harassment from his supervisor were not addressed by upper management; 9. On or around March 23, 2016, Complainant became aware his supervisor characterized him as a harasser and made false statements to him and about him since February 23, 2015 and ongoing; 10. On May 6, 2016, Complainant became aware that his supervisor promised him he would prepare a presentation for a Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) meeting, however, Complainant was never instructed by his supervisor to prepare this presentation; and 2 The record reflects that Complainant’s issues concerned matters outside of his harassment allegations, the Commission declined to address Complainant’s later raised issues stemming from the Basu Class Action and the Agency’s handling of Complainant’s non-compliance letter regarding the settlement in that class action. We also declined to address Complainant’s request for sanctions for the same reason. 2021000427 3 11. In or around May 16, 2016, June 9, 2016, and other date(s) to be specified, Complainant’s supervisor made false and negative remarks about his work ethics in an attempt to discredit him and his character. After an investigation into his EEO complaint, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of his right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing but subsequently withdrew his request. Consequently, the Agency issued a final decision pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b). In EEOC Appeal No. 2019005746, we affirmed the Agency’s final decision, concluding Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected him to discrimination as alleged. In his request for reconsideration of that decision, Complainant essentially repeats the same arguments made and considered during his original appeal. We emphasize that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. See EEO MD-110, Ch. 9, § VII.A. 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. 2019005746 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. 2021000427 4 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 8, 2021 Date