0120141219
10-14-2015
Meghann M.,1 Complainant, v. Robert McDonald, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs (Veterans Health Administration), Agency.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Meghann M.,1
Complainant,
v.
Robert McDonald,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs
(Veterans Health Administration),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120141219
Agency No. 200L-0598-2009104812
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final decision (FAD) by the Agency dated May 2, 2014, 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
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant was an employee at the Agency's Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System facility in Little Rock, Arkansas.
On July 10, 2013, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve an EEO matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
(1.1) In exchange for the promises and undertakings by the Agency, and the parties' mutual undertakings, the Complainant agrees to waive and give up all rights to further administrative processing of the complaint and related claims;
(1.2) Complainant agrees to withdraw and cancel complaint;
(1.4) Complainant agrees "to act on her right to representation by consulting with an attorney before entering into this Agreement;"
(2.1) Consideration: The Agency agrees, within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Agreement, "to pay to Complainant the amount of $15,000.00 and to pay to her attorney [named], the amount of $2,500 . . . in full and final compensation;
(3) Entire Agreement; This Agreement is the entire Agreement between the parties and there are no other terms to this Agreement except those herein specified; and
(3.1) Acceptance of Agreement: This Agreement has been read by, understood by, and has been freely entered into by both Parties.
The effective date of the Agreement was July 10, 2013, which was the date of signature for both parties. Complainant signed the Agreement in the presence of her attorney.
On January 22, 2014, Complainant wrote to the Commission, contesting the validity of the settlement agreement. In addition, by letter to the Agency, dated March 12, 2014, Complainant alleged that the Agreement should be deemed invalid, because she did not knowingly and willingly sign the Agreement.
Complainant acknowledges that she signed the agreement. Following her signing of the Agreement, Complainant contacted the Administrative Judge (AJ) who had been assigned to her EEO complaint to voice her objections in an effort to get the Agreement changed. The AJ no longer had jurisdiction, because the AJ dismissed the complaint after the settlement agreement was signed and entered with the AJ. Complainant stated that she was on medication at the time of signing and was coerced into signing the agreement. She did not specify which medication that she was on.
The record documents that the Agency issued Complainant a check for $15,000.00 on July 25, 2013. There is no evidence in the record, however, that shows that Complainant accepted, or received, the monetary consideration. Although the record shows that, on August 7, 2013, Complainant's attorney cashed the check that was issued to him for $2,500.00 in attorney's fees, the record does not show that Complainant ever cashed the check issued to her.
Agency Breach Determination
In its May 2, 2014 FAD, the Agency found that it was in compliance. The Agency reasoned that, "regardless of how [Complainant] may have felt on July 10, 2013, when she signed the settlement agreement, the Appellant went on to, in effect, ratify the settlement agreement by accepting payment of the $15,000.00 owed to her under the agreement." The Agency concluded that "this appeal is nothing more than an attack of 'buyer's remorse' on the part of the Appellant." The Agency stated that "there is simply no evidence whatsoever, other than the Appellant's bare allegations, that anyone coerced her into signing the July 10, 2013 settlement agreement."
This 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).
We find that the Agreement was knowingly entered, inasmuch as Complainant had the benefit of legal representation at the time of signing and she acknowledged that she signed the Agreement stating that her signature was voluntary. She has provided no evidence to show that she was incapacitated at the time of signing.
We find, therefore, that the Agreement was valid and binding on both parties.
In the instant case, there is no evidence that Complainant actually cashed the check for $15,000.00, which was the only consideration directly due her under the terms of this Agreement. We find, nevertheless, that the Agency met its burden of showing that it attempted to pay the consideration consistent with the terms of the Agreement.
Although we find no breach, but because of the amount of time that has passed, we will require the Agency to reissue a check in the amount of $15,000.00 to Complainant, if she has not yet cashed the original check. This will allow us to supplement our records to fully document that there was compliance in this matter.
Complainant is cautioned, however, that should she not cash the check, she is not entitled to any other relief or the reinstatement of the complaint.
Accordingly, we MODIFY the Agency's Breach Decision, in part, and REMAND the matter in accordance with the ORDER below.
ORDER
Within sixty (60) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, the Agency is ordered to reissue to Complainant a check for $15,000.00, if Complainant has not cashed the previously issued check, and to notify Complainant of her option to accept the reissued check in the amount of $15,000.00 as full and final relief. The Agency shall also notify Complainant that she has fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of her receipt of the Agency's notice and check within which to cash the check.
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
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.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0815)
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 tends 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), 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, 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 (R0610)
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 (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 Complainants 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
October 14, 2015
__________________
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
0120141219
2
0120141219