Forrest D. Riley, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 16, 2009
0120091230 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 16, 2009)

0120091230

04-16-2009

Forrest D. Riley, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Forrest D. Riley,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120091230

Agency No. 4F900040908

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final

decision (FAD) by the agency dated January 8, 2009, finding that it was

in compliance with the terms of the October 8, 2008 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:

(1) Joyce will pay up to $150.00 to pay the cost of late fees incurred

as a result of nonpayment of sick leave hours.

Complainant contacted the agency on November 11, 2008, alleging that

the agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that

the agency specifically implement its terms. Specifically, complainant

alleged that the agency failed to pay him the money owed.

In its January 8, 2009 FAD, the agency concluded it was not in breach

since the agreement gave no time limit and stating that the supervisor

"would take care of it."

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).

In the instant case, the agreement states that the agency would pay

complainant up to $150.00. The agency asserts that since the agreement

has no time limit, it is not in breach of the agreement. The Commission

notes that on appeal complainant asserts he submitted documents supporting

his request for $150.00 on October 14, 2008 and as of February 20, 2009,

he has not been paid. The agency did not provide any explanation for the

delay or any steps it has taken to pay complainant. To that extent, the

Commission finds that the agency is in breach of the agreement. Merely

because there is no date does not mean that the agency does not have

to act within a reasonable amount of time. Here, four months later the

agency merely says the matter will be taken care of. The agency made

no arguments in response to complainant's appeal other than to state it

did not warrant a waiver of the regulations. The Commission finds the

agency is in breach of the agreement and is ordered to comply with the

order set forth below.

ORDER (C0900)

The agency is ordered to take the following remedial action:

I. Within 30 days of the date this decision becomes final, the agency

shall pay complainant any monies owed to him up to $150.00 for the

documentation that he submitted in October 2008. 1

The agency is further directed to submit a report of compliance, as

provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's

Decision." The report shall include supporting documentation verifying

that the corrective action has been implemented.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K1208)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar

days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The report shall

be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal Operations,

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington,

DC 20013. The agency's report must contain supporting documentation,

and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to the complainant.

If the agency does not comply with the Commission's order, the complainant

may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503(a). The complainant also has the right to file a civil action

to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior to or following

an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407,

1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(g). Alternatively, the complainant

has the right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in

accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File A Civil

Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action for

enforcement or a civil action on the underlying complaint is subject

to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999).

If the complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of

the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1208)

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 77960,

Washington, DC 20013. 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 (R0408)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date

that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. 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. Filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1008)

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

April 16, 2009

__________________

Date

01 & 07 Procedural Case Code Sheet - INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY

Initials Date TO: Carlton M. Hadden, Director, Office of

Federal Operations Robbie Dix III, Acting Director, Appellate

Review Programs FROM: Mary-Jean Secoolish, Attorney April 14, 2009

Mary Jean Secoolish, Supervisor Catherine McNamara,

Division Director Appeal Number(s) 0120091230 Agency Number(s)

4F900040908 Hearing Number(s) Complainant(s): Forrest D. Riley Agency:

USPS Decision: Breach Statute(s) Alleged Basis(es) Alleged Issue(s)

Alleged SB (Where Discrimination Is

Found Only): (A) Basis(es) For Finding: (B) Issues In Finding

(Check All Applicable Codes) Procedural Codes ? 3K - Procedural

Decision

? 3N - Appeal Denied/Dismissed

? 3P - Adverse Inference

? 4H - OFO Affirmed FAD

? 3M - OFO Reversed and Remanded

? 4J - OFO Modified FAD

? 3L - OFO Vacated/Remanded ALL of

Agency's Merits Decision

? 4Q - Compliance required ? 3B - FAD Rescinded

? 3C - Duplicate Docket Number

? 3D - Withdrawal

? 3E - Complaint Settled

? 3G - Other Letter Closure

? 3R - Return to Agency for Consolidation

? 3S - Return to AJ for Consolidation

? 7N - Civil Action Filed Merits Settlement Codes ? 4A - Merits

decision

? 4R - OFO found settlement breach

? 4S - OFO found no settlement breach

? 4E - Agency found settlement breach

? 4F - Agency found no settlement breach

? 4H - OFO affirmed agency

? 4I - OFO reversed agency

? 4J - OFO modified agency (NOTE: if affirmed

In part and reversed in part, then (3L)

Code required if at least one issue is

remanded) ? 3L - OFO remanded PART of the agency's

merits decision (NOTE: If breach is

basis, use of 3L also requires 4I code)

? 3P - Adverse inference

? 5R - class complaint certified

? 5S - class complaint not certified (class requirements not met)

? 5T - class complaint not certified (procedural dismissal)

? 5U - class complaint certification remanded for additional discovery

? 4Q - Compliance required

Revised 6/22/05

ARP Companion Case Checklist

Complainant Agency Appeal/Request/Petition No. Forrest D. Riley USPS

0120091230

OPEN CASES

Appeal No. IMS Status Related (Yes/No) Actions Taken

CLOSED CASES

Appeal No. IMS Status Related (Yes/No) Actions Taken

CLASS ACTION CASES

Appeal No. IMS Status Related (Yes/No) Actions Taken

Mary-Jean Secoolish April 14, 2009

Attorney Date

1 The record does not contain a copy of the documentation submitted by

complaint,

??

??

??

??

2

0120091230

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

4

0120091230

5

0120091230