EEOC Appeal 2025003457

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Heath P.,1
Complainant,
v.
Dr. Troy E. Meink,
Secretary,
Department of the Air Force,
Agency.
Appeal No. 2025003457
Agency No. 9P0J2100401
Hearing No. 451-2022-00053X
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC or Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403, from the Agency’s June
6, 2025 final order concerning his equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint
of employment discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. For the reasons
that follow, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order.
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant was employed by
the Agency as a probationary Civilian Simulator Instructor at the Agency’s Naval
Air Station in Pensacola, Florida.
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.

2025003457	2
On July 16, 2021, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency
subjected him to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the basis of
disability (physical) as evidenced by multiple incidents including, inter alia, he was
excluded 	from 	vital 	correspondence 	concerning 	his 	job 	requirements 	and
organizational appointments; his requests for physical fitness activities and sick
leave for medical appointments were denied; he was issued an improperly formatted
and executed notice of proposed termination; his assignment to an academic
instructor course was delayed; his requested meeting concerning an allegedly
unprofessional conversation with another employee was delayed; he was issued a
falsified appointment letter concerning his simulator instructor qualifications and
training; and he received a final notice of termination.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a
copy of the report of investigation and notice of his right to request a hearing before
an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing before
an AJ. Following a hearing, the AJ issued a decision finding that Complainant was
not subjected to discrimination or a hostile work environment as alleged. The
Agency subsequently issued a final order fully implementing the AJ’s decision. The
instant appeal followed.
We find that substantial record evidence supports the AJ's finding that the alleged
incidents were insufficiently severe or pervasive to establish a discriminatory or
retaliatory hostile work environment. Furthermore, the Commission finds that
Complainant failed to show that the alleged conduct was based on discriminatory
animus. Rather, the record shows that the leave approval process was applied to
Complainant in the same manner as to his coworkers, including employees without
known disabilities, and that other employees also had concerns regarding the
supervisor’s leave approval practices. The AJ further found that the alleged errors
concerning Complainant’s assignment and termination documents were clerical
errors and that the evidence did not establish discriminatory intent.
In addition, the AJ credited the testimony of the Director of Operations that he
upheld Complainant’s termination because he found the Agency’s termination
package more credible than Complainant’s response. The record reflects that
Complainant was a probationary employee and that the Agency determined that he
failed to comply with assigned work requirements during the student training stand-
down period.

2025003457	3
Although Complainant disputed the Agency’s assessment of his performance and
the manner in which the assignments were administered, disagreement with a
supervisor’s management style, workplace decisions, or manner of supervision does
not, without more, establish discriminatory harassment. The AJ also properly
considered the Agency’s internal investigation, which found that the supervisor had
subjected his employees to a hostile work environment under the Agency’s broader
anti-harassment policy, but correctly determined that those findings did not establish
that the conduct was linked to Complainant’s disability or otherwise constituted
unlawful harassment under the Rehabilitation Act.
Moreover, to the extent that Complainant is alleging disparate treatment regarding
his claims, substantial record evidence supports that Complainant failed to show that
the Agency's explanation for its actions was pretext for discrimination.
CONCLUSION
Upon careful review of the AJ's decision and the evidence of record, as well as the
parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that substantial evidence of record
supports the AJ's determination that Complainant has not proven discrimination by
the Agency as alleged. 	Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency's final order
implementing the AJ's decision.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1125)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if
Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or
evidence that tend to establish 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.
Requests for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Sector
(OFS) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision.

2025003457	4
If the party requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of
the request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for
reconsideration. 	A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of
another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or
statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity
Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B
(Aug. 5, 2015).
Complainant should submit their request for reconsideration, and any statement or
brief in support of their request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at
https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx. 	Alternatively, Complainant can
submit their request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Sector, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box
77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20507. 	In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s
request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFS receives it by mail within
five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604.
An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the
EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either
party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of
service on the other party, unless Complainant files their request via the EEOC
Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required.
Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s
request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented
the timely filing of the request. 	Any supporting documentation must be
submitted together with the request for reconsideration. 	The Commission will
consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited
circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(f).
COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0124)
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 their
full name and official title.

2025003457	5
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. If you file a request to reconsider and also file a civil
action, filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your
complaint.
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:
T. Gimbrere ___________ 	Acting Director's signature
T. Gimbrere, Acting Director
Office of Federal Sector
September 16, 2026
Date