Richard T. Goods, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 19, 2005
01a45942 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 19, 2005)

01a45942

09-19-2005

Richard T. Goods, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Richard T. Goods v. United States Postal Service

01A45942

September 19, 2005

.

Richard T. Goods,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A45942

Agency No. 4F-900-0112-02

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final

decision by the agency dated July 29, 2004, finding that it was in

compliance with the terms of the June 7, 2002 settlement agreement into

which the parties entered.

The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:

(a) [Complainant] will be allowed a one-time reassignment to NW area.

(b) [Complainant] will request upward mobility with a 991 attached from

each [Customer Service Operations] CSO.

(c) [Person A] will instruct CSO to meet with [complainant] and provide

him with equal opportunity for upward mobility.

(d) CSOs will identify available opportunities for upward mobility and

areas for improvement.

CSOs will provide feedback as to reasons why [complainant] is not

selected upon written request.

By letter to the agency dated February 25, 2004, complainant alleged

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

that the agency specifically implement its terms. Complainant alleged

that the only part of the agreement that has been kept is provision (b).

He notes that he has sent the letters and 991s specified in provision

(b), but has not met with anyone as stated in the agreement.

In its July 29, 2004 decision, the agency concluded that the agreement was

not breached. The agency stated that Person A had a meeting in June 2002,

with the CSOs and requested they afford complainant detail opportunities

whenever possible. The agency noted that complainant was detailed to

Acting Manager, Customer Service for ten months at Sunset Station and

then for an unspecified time at West Adams Station. The agency also

noted that complainant spent two months at Wagner Station and then was

sent to Market Station.

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 present case, we are unable to determine whether the agency has

complied with provision (a) of the subject settlement agreement. We note

provision (a) provides complainant will be allowed a one-time reassignment

to the Northwest area. We note that although the agency showed that

complainant was given detail opportunities to serve as Acting Manager,

Customer Services in Sunset Station, West Adams Station, Wagner Station

and Market Station, the agency failed to address whether complainant was

provided the reassignment to the Northwest area specified in provision

(a). With regard to provision (c), complainant has alleged that he has

not met with anyone regarding the agreement. The record contains a July

13, 2004 letter from the Manager, Labor Relations in which it states

that in June 2002, Person B, CSO, met with complainant and informed

him that at the time there were not any opportunities; however, Person

B agreed to send complainant to Bicentennial Station as a SCS and if

complainant did a good job, he would be allowed to be a replacement

Manager, Customer Services in Person B's area. On appeal, complainant

does not dispute the agency's characterization of the June 2002 meeting

with Person B. We find complainant has not shown that provisions (c),

(d), or (e) were breached by the agency.

Accordingly, the agency's decision that it complied with provision (a)

is VACATED and is REMANDED for further action in accordance with the

Order below. Additionally, the agency's decision that it complied with

provisions (c), (d), and (e) is AFFIRMED.

ORDER

The agency shall take the following actions:

The agency shall supplement the record with evidence indicating whether it

has complied with provision (a), including documentation of its efforts

to reassign complainant to the Northwest Area.

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

issue a decision determining whether the agency breached provision (a)

of the settlement agreement. A copy of the agency's decision must be

sent to the Compliance Officer referenced herein.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0501)

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 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 (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 (T0900)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision/action in part, but it

also requires the agency to continue its administrative processing of a

portion of your complaint. 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 on both that portion

of your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that portion

of the complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative

processing. 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 your appeal with the Commission, until

such time as the agency issues its final decision on your complaint.

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

September 19, 2005

__________________

Date