Will K.,1 Complainant,v.Dr. Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., M.D., Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Dec 13, 2017

0520170525 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 13, 2017)

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

Will K.,1
Complainant,

v.

Dr. Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., M.D.,
Secretary,
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Agency.

Request No. 0520170525

Appeal No. 0120171671

Agency No. HUD-00088-2015

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120171671 (June 30, 2017). 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 his underlying complaint, Complainant claimed that he was discriminated against on the bases
of his race (Caucasian), sex (male), disability, age, and in reprisal for his prior EEO activity
when he became aware that he was not interviewed or selected for the position of Regional
Public Housing Director, Office of Field Operations, Office of Public and Indian Housing.

In its final decision, the Agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to EEOC Regulation 29
C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2) on the grounds that Complainant failed to file the complaint in a timely
manner. The Agency determined that Complainant received a notice of right to file a formal

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.
0520170525

2
complaint on September 15, 2015, but did not file his formal complaint until October 1, 2015,
one day after the expiration of the fifteen-day filing period.

On appeal, the Commission addressed Complainant’s arguments and found that the Agency
properly dismissed the complaint. We were not persuaded by Complainant’s contentions and
found that he did not provide adequate justification to warrant an extension of the time period for
filing a complaint.

In his request to reconsider, Complainant contends that our prior decision should be reversed
because the EEO Counselor assured him that he met the filing deadline by filing the complaint
on October 1, 2015. Complainant criticizes the fact that it took almost eighteen months to notify
him of his untimely filing. Complainant maintains that he would have gone forward with
subsequent complaints had he known the instant complaint would be dismissed. Complainant
states that he was told these subsequent complaints would be consolidated with the instant
complaint.

In response, the Agency asserts that Complainant’s reliance on the alleged representation of the
EEO Counselor in no way impeded his ability to file a timely complaint, and thus does not
justify extending the filing deadline. The Agency notes that Complainant admits in his request to
reconsider that his formal complaint was not mailed until October 1, 2015.

We find that Complainant’s request for reconsideration fails to show that our previous decision
involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or would have a substantial
impact on the policies, practices or operations of the Agency. We note that a request for
reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. E.g., Lopez v. Dep’t of Agriculture,
EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007); EEO Management Directive for Part 1614
(EEO MD-110), Chap. 9, §VII.A. (Aug. 5, 2015). We find that Complainant’s argument
concerning the EEO Counselor’s alleged misrepresentation does not negate the fact that he filed
the instant complaint on October 1, 2015, one day after the expiration of the fifteen-day filing
period. We find that Complainant has not provided adequate justification for an extension of the
filing period.

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. 0120171671 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
0520170525

3
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

December 13, 2017
Date