0120161671
07-12-2016
Kendra W.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Kendra W.,1
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Pacific Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120161671
Agency No. 4E553003913
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final decision by the Agency, dated March 10, 2016, finding that it was in compliance with the terms of the 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.
BACKGROUND
Believing that the Agency subjected her to unlawful discrimination, Complainant contacted an Agency EEO Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process.
On October 22, 2013, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
The parties agree to implement the previous REDRESS mediation settlement dated February 13, 2013, USPS EEO case number 4E-553-0012-13. [Named manager "GH"] and [named manager "JR"] will attend the first meeting following this mediation which is expected to be November 6 or 7th. If [Complainant] or [her representative] requests her attendance, [GH] will attend the second meeting. [GH] will contact [the previous station manager] regarding how she documented the previous meeting conversations. The parties agree that a new manager will be made aware of the terms of the agreement. The new manager will have the option to re-negotiate the terms of the agreement with [Complainant]. This agreement resolves the complaint made by [Complainant] regarding a breach of the previous agreement [in EEO case 4E-553-0015-14].
The prior settlement agreement for EEO case number 4E-553-0012-13 required the following, in relevant part:
[Complainant] and [named management official "SM"] agree to meet weekly. [two named managers] attend the 1st meeting. [SM] and [Complainant] can agree when to change the meetings to every two weeks, and monthly, or end the meetings as agreed upon by both parties. Parties will request Union Steward and Supervisor to be present at the meetings.
According to the record, on June 27, 2015, Complainant alleged that the Agency was in breach of the October 22, 2013 settlement agreement.
In its March 10, 2016 final decision, the Agency concluded it was not in breach of the agreement. The Agency outlined all of the meetings that were held between May 14, 2014, and October 15, 2015. In addition, the Agency noted that some months Complainant did not show for meetings because she was not present at work. Thus, the Agency found that it had made reasonable efforts to have the meetings agreed to.
The instant appeal followed.
ANALYSIS
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. Dep't of Def., 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. Dep't 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. U.S. Postal Serv., 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 record reflects that the Agency tried to have as many meetings as possible, but Complainant's attendance at the meeting seems to have been sporadic. Meetings were cancelled because she was tardy or called in sick. Some months, Complainant worked a few days - only five days in September 2014, four days in October 2014 and February 2015), and seven days in March 2015 and June 2015. As such, we find ample support for the Agency's assertion that it made a good faith effort to comply with the agreements.
In her appeal, Complainant references matters concerning other EEO complaints not at issue here, as well as claiming the Agency has failed to address a breach allegation filed in January 2014. However, in its response to the appeal, the Agency stated that it issued a letter of determination on the January 2014 breach allegations on May 8, 2014. A copy of the Agency's decision is in the record. We have no record that Complainant ever appealed this decision.
The Agency's decision that it complied with the agreements is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0416)
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), at Chap. 9 � VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The requests may be submitted via regular mail to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. 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 (S0610)
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 (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:
______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden's signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
July 12, 2016
__________________
Date
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.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0120161671
2
0120161671