[Redacted], Zetta B., 1 Complainant,v.Robert Wilkie, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jan 13, 2021

Appeal No. 2020004625 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 13, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Zetta B.,1 Complainant, v. Robert Wilkie, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency. Request No. 2021000237 Appeal No. 2020004625 Agency No. 200I-0626-2020104534 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Zetta B. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 2020004625 (Oct. 6, 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). In her underlying complaint, Complainant, a Nurse Manager at the VA Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, claimed that she was subjected to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the bases of her race (African-American), age (57), and in reprisal for her prior protected EEO activity when : (1) on April 29, 2020, the Chief Nurse had a meeting with the Chief of Staff and during the meeting the Chief of Staff referred to Complainant in a very derogatory and highly inappropriate manner; and (2) while working in the gastrointestinal lab, a physician was verbally abusive, aggressive, demeaning, controlling and intimidating. 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. 2021000237 2 The Agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(1) on the grounds of failure to state a claim. The Agency reasoned that the Commission’s regulations are not a general civility code and the matters were too vague to state an actionable claim. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal decision. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant provides additional details for the first time about the Chief of Staff’s comments. Complainant states that the Chief Nurse called her and told her about the conversation. Complainant notes that the Chief of Staff came to her office the same day to apologize for his comments. In response, the Agency asserts that Complainant has failed to satisfy the criteria of a request for reconsideration. 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. With regard to Complainant’s request for reconsideration, we find that Complainant has not explained why the evidence she submits in her request was not presented on appeal. This is evidence that could have been obtained and presented long before the instant request for reconsideration. We find that inadequate justification has been presented at this point to consider such evidence. Therefore, we find that Complainant has not submitted 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. 2020004625 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. 2021000237 3 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 13, 2021 Date