01A40474
02-19-2004
Vanessa L. Davis, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Vanessa L. Davis v. United States Postal Service
01A40474
February 19, 2004
.
Vanessa L. Davis,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A40474
Agency No. 4F-900-0093-03
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency
decision, issued on September 23, 2003, finding that it was in compliance
with the terms of the March 26, 2003 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:
Management will input requested leave. If documentation is requested
by management [complainant] will provide it within 3 days of return to
work or usage.
The request for reviewing [complainant's] file - management will allow
the review of file within 10 days in the presence of the shop steward.
By letter to the agency dated April 11, 2003, complainant alleged 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 input her leave, pay her for her leave,
or allow her to review her personnel file. Complainant also asked "to
be made whole" and for interest for the time she should have been paid.
On August 6, 2003, the EEO Manager responded to complainant's allegation.
According to management, there was no breach. The individual who was
the Station Manager at the time the agreement was executed maintained
that complainant was allowed to review her in house Personnel file when
requested in writing. The EEO Manager noted that, based on documents
submitted by complainant, it appeared that the PS 3971 was submitted
and approved on March 31, 2003, but that the leave was not applied on
the check issued on April 11, 2003. Further, the manager stated that
"I am assuming by now, your pay has been adjusted for the leave" and
asked whether complainant was allowed to review the file.
In a letter dated August 17, 2003, complainant contended that the agency
was "still in violation" of the agreement. She explained that she was
"still having pay status problem[s]."
The agency issued a decision, on September 23, 2003, concluding that it
was in compliance with the settlement agreement. The agency reiterated
the Station Manager's statement that complainant was allowed to review
her personnel file when requested in writing. Further, the Station
Manager indicated that when medical documentation is timely submitted
there "should be no shortages on your checks." Therefore, the agency
concluded that there was no breach.
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).
Based on the instant record, the Commission is unable to determine whether
the agency "input[ted] requested leave" as required by the agreement.
While the agency has provided documents related to complainant's pay,
it is unclear what particular leave was to be inputted and whether this
was completed. Similarly, the agency decision relies on remarks from
the Station Manager in finding that complainant was allowed to review
her file when requested "in writing," but the record does not contain a
statement from the Station Manager.<1> Therefore, the Commission shall
remand the matter to the agency so that it may supplement the record
with: documentation demonstrating when complainant's requested leave
was inputted, and an affidavit from the Station Manager (at the time
the agreement was entered) regarding whether and when complainant was
permitted to review her personnel file.
Accordingly, the agency's decision is hereby VACATED. The complaint is
REMANDED to the agency for further processing in accordance with this
decision and the Order below.
ORDER
The agency shall supplement the record with evidence regarding the
agency's obligations under the March 26, 2003 settlement agreement.
The evidence shall include any documents related to the input of
complaint's requested leave and an affidavit from the Station Manager,
at the time the agreement was entered, addressing whether complainant was
allowed to review her personnel file. Within thirty (30) calendar days
of the date this decision becomes final, the agency shall issue a new
decision determining whether or not the settlement agreement was breached.
A copy of the new final agency decision must be sent to the Compliance
Officer as referenced below.
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 (R0900)
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 (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
February 19, 2004
__________________
Date
1 The Commission notes that the settlement
agreement language does not require complainant to put her request
in writing.