01a45620
02-15-2005
Claudia Lyons, Complainant, v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Claudia Lyons v. Department of Veterans Affairs
01A45620
February 15, 2005
.
Claudia Lyons,
Complainant,
v.
Anthony J. Principi,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A45620
Agency No. 200R-2277
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final
decision (FAD) by the agency dated June 30, 2004, finding that it was
in compliance with the terms of the July 25, 2002 settlement agreement
into which the parties entered. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.402; 29 C.F.R. �
1614.504(b); and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.
The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
(a) The Agency recognizes that the Complainant has a sincerely held
religious conviction that she should not work on Thursday through Saturday
of the week preceding Easter Sunday, Easter Sunday, and December 25.
The Agency will accommodate future requests for leave in the period from
the Wednesday through Saturday of the week preceding Easter Sunday, Easter
Sunday, and December 25 to the extent that the accommodation can be made
without causing undue hardship to the Agency, as provided in C.F.R. �
1605.2 copy attached as Exhibit �A� and in conformance with Article 32
of the Master Agreement between the Department of Veterans Affairs and
the American Federation of Government Employees, 1997, copy attached as
Exhibit �B,� the 1984 Local Supplemental Agreement, Article 10, section
1., copy attached as Exhibit �C.,� and Recreation Therapy Service's
Standard Operating Procedure 11K-7, copy attached as Exhibit �D.�
If the Agency determines, under clause (a) of this agreement, that the
requested accommodation would cause it undue hardship, it will explore
other methods of accommodating the Complainant, including suggestions
made by the Complainant. If there are other accommodations that can be
given, the Agency will offer the available accommodation which least
disadvantages the Complainant with respect to compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �
1605.2(c)(2)ii.
On March 16, 2004, complainant alleged that the agency breached the
settlement agreement. Specifically, complainant alleged that the
agency denied her request for leave on Easter and asked her to take an
alternative date off.
In its June 30, 2004 FAD, the agency concluded that it did not breach
the agreement. The FAD determined that after reviewing complainant's
leave request, her supervisor concluded that granting complainant the
requested leave would cause undue hardship to the agency. The FAD
further determined that complainant was offered alternative days off,
but declined the offers.
EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(a) provides that any settlement
agreement knowingly and voluntarily agreed to by the parties, reached at
any stage of the complaint process, shall be binding on both parties.
The Commission has held that a settlement agreement constitutes a
contract between the employee and the agency, to which ordinary rules
of contract construction apply. See Herrington v. Department of Defense,
EEOC Request No. 05960032 (December 9, 1996). The Commission has further
held that it is the intent of the parties as expressed in the contract,
not some unexpressed intention, that controls the contract's construction.
Eggleston v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05900795
(August 23, 1990). In ascertaining the intent of the parties with regard
to the terms of a settlement agreement, the Commission has generally
relied on the plain meaning rule. See Hyon O v. United States Postal
Service, EEOC Request No. 05910787 (December 2, 1991). This rule states
that if the writing appears to be plain and unambiguous on its face,
its meaning must be determined from the four corners of the instrument
without resort to extrinsic evidence of any nature. See Montgomery
Elevator Co. v. Building Eng'g Servs. Co., 730 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1984).
Although the Commission is not generally concerned with the adequacy
or fairness of consideration in a settlement agreement as long as some
legal detriment is incurred, when one of the parties to a settlement
incurs no legal detriment, the agreement will be set aside for lack
of consideration. See Morita v. Department of Air Force, EEOC Request
No. 05960450 (December 12, 1997); MacNair v. United States Postal Service,
EEOC Appeal No. 01964653 (July 1, 1997).
In the instant case, provisions (a) and (d) merely promise complainant
what she is already entitled to receive under Title VII. See 29 C.F.R. �
1605.2. Therefore, we find that provisions (a) and (d) of the settlement
agreement are void and unenforceable. However, given that consideration
was exchanged through other provisions of the settlement agreement,
we find that the entire settlement agreement is not invalid but rather
reformed without provisions (a) and (d).
Accordingly, the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's finding of no breach
for the reasons stated herein.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0701)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this
case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing
arguments or evidence which 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 to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed
with the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar
days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of
receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29
C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for
29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests
and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal
Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,
Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the
request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by
mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.
See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include
proof of service on the other party.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your
request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances
prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation
must be submitted with your 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(c).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0900)
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. 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 (Z1199)
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 that the Court appoint
an attorney to represent you and that the Court 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 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
_February 15, 2005_________________
Date