Shaniqua W.,1 Complainant,v.Richard V. Spencer, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Apr 26, 2018

0520180235 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 26, 2018)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Shaniqua W.,1
Complainant,

v.

Richard V. Spencer,
Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.

Request No. 0520180235

Appeal No. 0120180463

Hearing No. 430-2015-00285X

Agency No. DON-14-41112-03811

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Shaniqua W. v. Dep’t of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No.
0120180463 (Feb. 2, 2018). 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 October 20, 2014, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging that the Agency
subjected her to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the bases of disability, color
(brown), and race (African-American) as evidenced by multiple incidents including, inter alia,
she was instructed to create a position description that she did not want to create; she was
referred to as a “bulldog” due to her communication style with customers; she was offended by

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.
0520180235

2
the way her supervisor spoke to her; and she received a document referencing her email
communications and how supervisors felt she should communicate with customers.2

Following an investigation, Complainant timely requested a hearing. The EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ) assigned to the matter granted the Agency’s motion for summary judgment and
issued a decision finding that Complainant had not been subjected to discrimination or a hostile
work environment as alleged. The Agency subsequently issued a final order fully implementing
the AJ’s decision. Complainant appealed and, in Shaniqua W. v. Dep’t of the Navy, EEOC
Appeal No. 0120180463 (Feb. 2, 2018), the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final order.

In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the appellate
decision and reiterates arguments previously made and considered on appeal. 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), at 9-
18 (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.

The Commission notes that Complainant raised several issues regarding the AJ’s handling of her
case. As noted above, the AJ declined to accept Complainant’s request to amend her complaint
to include additional claims. In addition, Complainant claimed that the AJ ignored her submitted
documents before granting summary judgment in favor of the Agency. The record reveals,
however, that the AJ responded to Complainant’s request to include the submitted evidence
stating that “[a]ll of your documents are here in the record.” Complainant has not presented any
evidence demonstrating that the Commission erred in finding that the AJ properly granted
summary judgment in this matter. Moreover, the Commission finds that Complainant has not
presented any evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission’s finding that she failed to
show that she was subjected to discrimination or a hostile work environment.

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. 0120180463 remains the
Commission’s decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the
Commission on this request.

2 The record indicates that Complainant attempted to amend her complaint to allege additional
claims; however, the EEOC Administrative Judge assigned to the matter declined to accept the
amended claims.
0520180235

3
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

April 26, 2018
Date