0520110528
12-05-2011
Eric L. Wiggins, Complainant, v. Mike Donley, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.
Eric L. Wiggins,
Complainant,
v.
Mike Donley,
Secretary,
Department of the Air Force,
Agency.
Request No. 0520110528
Appeal No. 0120110479
Hearing Nos. 410-2009-00351X & 410-2009-00352X
Agency Nos. 4U1L08001 & 4U1L09001
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Eric
L. Wiggins v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110479
(Apr. 8, 2011). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its
discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision
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(b).
The previous decision found that the Agency did not discriminate against
Complainant or subjected him to a hostile work environment on the bases of
sex (male), race (African-American), or reprisal for prior EEO activity
for various alleged incidences. For example, Complainant alleged that
his supervisors had physically restrained him from exiting a conference
room, denied his request for additional time-off to vote, questioned his
whereabouts, denied his leave request for a feedback session, denied his
request for overtime to attend a feedback session, handcuffed him during
a bomb threat, suspended him for insolence, reassigned him to another
position, denied his requests for annual leave, and made entries into
an employee folder.
The previous decision found that there was not enough evidence to show
that Complainant had been physically restrained in a conference room.
As for the other claims, the previous decision found that the Agency
articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory, and nonretaliatory reasons for
its actions. Although Complainant tried to argue that his supervisors
had subjected him to increased scrutiny, and failed to adhere to relevant
personnel policies or past practices, the previous decision found that
these arguments were not sufficient to establish that management’s
actions were motivated by discrimination or retaliation. Therefore,
the previous decision found that Complainant failed to establish that
the Agency’s articulated reasons and explanations were pretexts for
discrimination.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant attempts to reargue
the merits of his case. We remind Complainant 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) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17. A reconsideration request
is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a
clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) will
have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of
the Agency.
Here, we find no persuasive evidence that indicates that the previous
decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of a material
fact. 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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to
deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120110479 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 (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot
afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that
the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also
permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other
security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
29 U.S.C. §§ 791, 794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within
the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney
with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action.
Both the request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits
as stated in the paragraph above (“Right to File a Civil Action”).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
__12/5/11________________
Date
2
0520110528
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520110528