Lois W. Shoemaker, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 25, 1999
01980830_r (E.E.O.C. Mar. 25, 1999)

01980830_r

03-25-1999

Lois W. Shoemaker, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Lois W. Shoemaker, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01980830

) Agency No. 4F-913-1068-95

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

)

DECISION

On November 1, 1997, appellant filed a timely appeal with this Commission

from an October 24, 1997 final agency decision. In its final decision,

the agency determined that it did not breach the settlement agreement

and, accordingly, denied appellant's request to reinstate her complaint.

See 29 C.F.R. ��1614.504, .402(a); EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.

The record contains a Settlement Agreement, fully executed on July 19,

1996, which reflects, in pertinent part, that: (1) appellant would

be given equal consideration for overtime opportunities commensurate

with all part time flexible employees; (2) appellant would be given

equal consideration for job assignments commensurate with all part time

flexible employees, with full consideration being given to job skills and

abilities without regard to gender; and (3) appellant would receive 12

hours of overtime pay. In exchange, appellant agreed not to institute

a lawsuit and to withdraw her request for a hearing.

A September 8, 1997 EEO Request for Counseling reveals that appellant

alleged that two men received overtime for September 8, 1997, and that

this practice was ongoing. She further alleged that only men were

allowed to report to work early and that men received night differential

and overtime. The agency treated appellant's EEO Request for Counseling

as a notice of an alleged breach of the settlement agreement.

In its final decision, the agency determined that it had not breached the

agreement. The agency noted that appellant's medical restrictions limited

her to working four days every other week and that the restrictions

precluded her from receiving the same amount of overtime work as other

employees. The agency further noted that appellant was afforded overtime

work when it was needed and when she was available to work overtime.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.504 provides that any settlement agreement

knowingly and voluntarily agreed to by the parties shall be binding on

both parties. The regulation further provides that if the complainant

believes that the agency failed to comply with the terms of the settlement

agreement, the complainant shall notify the Director of Equal Employment

Opportunity, in writing, of the alleged noncompliance with the settlement

agreement, within thirty (30) days of when the complainant knew or should

have known of the alleged noncompliance. The complainant may request that

the terms of the settlement agreement be specifically implemented or,

alternatively, that the complaint be reinstated for further processing

from the point that processing ceased. The agency shall resolve the

matter and respond to the complainant, in writing. If the agency has not

responded to the complainant, in writing, or if the complainant is not

satisfied with the agency's attempt to resolve the matter, the complainant

may appeal to the Commission for a determination as to whether the agency

has complied with the terms of the settlement agreement or final decision.

The Commission has held that settlement agreements are contracts

between appellant and the agency and it is the intent of the parties

as expressed in the contract, and not some unexpressed intention, that

controls the contract's construction. Eggleston v. Department of Veterans

Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05900795 (August 23, 1990). In addition, the

Commission generally follows the rule that if a 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 v. Building Engineering Services,

730 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1984). The Commission has followed this rule

when interpreting settlement agreements. The Commission's policy in

this regard is based on the premise that the face of the agreement best

reflects the understanding of the parties.

Appellant's allegation that she was not considered for overtime

on September 8, 1997, constitutes a claim that a subsequent act

of discrimination violated the settlement agreement. Accordingly,

we find that the agency improperly processed appellant's allegation

as a breach allegation, rather than as a new complaint. Under EEOC

Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.504(c), an allegation that a subsequent act

of discrimination violates a settlement agreement is properly processed

under 29 C.F.R. �1614.106, not as a breach of a settlement agreement

under �1614.504(c). In addition, it also appears that appellant may

be raising issues of discrimination regarding the agency's application

of night differential and reporting hours. Therefore, we shall remand

these matter to the agency for further processing in accordance with 29

C.F.R. �1614.106.

The agency's final decision is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED to

the agency for further processing in accordance with this decision and

the applicable regulations.

ORDER

The agency is ORDERED to take the following actions:

Within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final,

the agency shall notify appellant of the opportunity to meet with an EEO

Counselor to clarify her allegations. Appellant shall have fifteen (15)

calendar days from the date of receipt of the agency's notice within

which to contact the Counselor;

If appellant elects to pursue her allegations, the agency shall continue

processing her allegations in accordance with the applicable regulations.

A copy of the agency's notice to appellant of the opportunity to

meet with an EEO Counselor must be sent to the Compliance Officer as

referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0595)

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 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to

the appellant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the appellant may petition the Commission for enforcement of

the order. 29 C.F.R. �1614.503 (a). The appellant 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. �� 1614.408, 1614.409, and 1614.503 (g). Alternatively,

the appellant 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. �� 1614.408 and 1614.409. 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) (Supp. V 1993). If the

appellant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the

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

See 29 C.F.R. �1614.410.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received by the

Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0993)

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. It is the position of the Commission that 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. You should be aware, however, that courts in some

jurisdictions have interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner

suggesting that a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS from the date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your

civil action is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN

THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision

or to consult an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the

jurisdiction in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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:

March 25, 1999

DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director

Office of Federal Operations