EEOC Appeal 2020001465

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Thomasina B., 1
Complainant,
v.
Robert Wilkie,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs
(Veterans Health Administration),
Agency.
Request No. 2020001465
Appeal No. 2019004860
Agency No. 200I05162016102804
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Thomasina B. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal
No. 2019004860 (Nov. 5, 2019). 	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 the underlying complaint, Complainant, a Clinical Pharmacist at the C.W. Bill Young VA
Medical Center (VAMC) in Bay Pines, Florida, alleged that the Agency unlawfully retaliated
against her (for prior protected EEO activity) when, on February 16, 18, and 19, 2016, it required
her to use annual leave to attend the depositions of management officials in her civil court case.
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.

2020001465	2
Our previous decision affirmed the Agency’s final order fully adopting an EEOC Administrative
Judge’s summary judgment decision in favor of the Agency finding no reprisal. Specifically, in
the appellate decision, we concluded that Complainant failed to show, by a preponderance of the
evidence, that the proffered reason for the leave charged in this matter was a pretext masking
unlawful retaliatory animus. Accordingly, the Commission found that Complainant failed to show
that she was subjected to reprisal as alleged.
In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the
previous decision and reiterates arguments previously made on appeal. 	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. 	Complainant has not done so here.
Complainant has not presented 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. 2019004860 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. The court has the sole
discretion to grant or deny these types of requests.

2020001465	3
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
September 2, 2020
Date