EEOC Appeal 2025003585

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Nila S.,1
Complainant,
v.
Bradford Wilson,
Archivist of the United States,
National Archives and Records Administration,
Agency.
Appeal No. 2025003585
Hearing No. 560-2024-00165X
Agency No. 2023-15STL
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC or Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(a), from the Agency’s
July 1, 2025 final order concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO)
complaint of employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. and Section 501 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et
seq. For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the Agency’s final order.
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as an
Archives Technician at the Agency’s National Personnel Records Center in St.
Louis, Missouri.
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.

2025003585	2
On July 18, 2023, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency
subjected her to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the bases of sex
(female), disability (physical), and reprisal (prior protected EEO activity) when:
1. 	On June 19, 2019, management affected Complainant’s pay by denying
her the ability to earn credit time while allowing a male co-worker to earn
credit time;
2. 	On March 3, 2023, Complainant was charged Leave Without Pay (LWOP)
for pay period five and pay period six, although management was advised
that an amendment be made to correct LWOP;
3. 	From March 17, 2023, through the present, management did not follow the
terms of Complainant’s reasonable accommodation agreement; and
4. 	On January 23, 2023, Complainant was reprimanded by management for
allegedly posting inappropriate content in the chat communication system
for the call center, although management did not reprimand a co-worker
for the same thing.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a
copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before
an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing. The
AJ granted the Agency’s motion and issued a summary judgment decision finding
that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination. The Agency subsequently
issued a final order fully adopting the AJ’s decision. The instant appeal followed.
Having thoroughly reviewed the record and construing any inferences raised by the
undisputed facts in favor of Complainant, we find that a reasonable factfinder could
not find in Complainant’s favor. We find that the alleged incidents, even assuming
they occurred as described by Complainant, were more likely the result of routine
supervision, personality conflicts, and general workplace disputes and tribulations
and are therefore insufficiently severe or pervasive to establish a discriminatory
hostile work environment and not sufficiently material to deter protected activity to
establish a retaliatory hostile work environment.

2025003585	3
Furthermore, 	the 	record 	is 	devoid 	of 	evidence 	beyond 	Complainant’s 	mere
speculation and suspicion that the alleged conduct was based on discriminatory or
retaliatory animus. For example, management denied Complainant credit time
because it did not have sufficient work to justify credit time and Complainant was
not “Fully Successful” during the relevant timeframe. Complainant was charged
with LWOP due to multiple amendments and excessive leave requests, which made
it appear in the system that Complainant did not have sufficient leave for her leave
requests. This LWOP charge was later corrected. Complainant was told to be
mindful what she posted in the Agency’s chat system after she posted a non-work-
related comment. We also find that Complainant failed to establish that the
explanations 	for the employment 	actions 	at issue herein were a pretext 	for
discriminatory or retaliatory animus.
In addition, the undisputed record shows that the Agency provided Complainant with
effective alternative accommodation based on medical documentation in support of
accommodation (i.e., extra time and breaks). Accordingly, the record does not
establish a failure to accommodate in violation of the Rehabilitation Act.
Upon careful review of the AJ’s decision and the evidence of record, including
arguments on appeal, we conclude that the AJ correctly determined that the
preponderance of the evidence did not establish that Complainant was discriminated
against 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.

2025003585	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.

2025003585	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