EEOC Appeal No. 0120161711
10-07-2016
Violet F. v. U.S Postal Serv.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Violet F.,1
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southern Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120161711
Agency No. 1G351000216
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final decision (FAD) by the Agency dated March 31, 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
On December 16, 2015, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve Complainant's EEO claims, referenced as USPS EEO Case No. 1G-351-002-16. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
(1) Management officials [named officials] agree that the Maintenance Operations Support Clerk (MOS)/Maintenance Support Clerk (MSC) position will not be filled until [named official] with Human Resources (HR) completes her review of Counselee's qualifications for the MOS/MSC position and PER list ... If HR determines in writing and without documentation that [Complainant] does not qualify, then she will reinstate her EEO claim.
The record includes an email communication, dated January 22, 2016, in which the HR official referenced in the Agreement stated her determination that Complainant was not qualified. The written communication stated that "the current exam requirement for a Maintenance Support Clerk includes Exam 718. According to our records, [Complainant] is not qualified on Exam 718." Complainant was informed that she "would have to be qualified on the current exam requirements and not any previous requirements for the position."
In addition, the Agency sent Complainant's representative (who is also a union representative) a letter dated February 17, 2016, which states that "Management contends the grievant is not qualified for the position since she is not qualified on exam 716."
By letter to the Agency dated February 26, 2016, Complainant alleged that the Agency was in breach of the settlement agreement. She requested that the Agency reinstate her complaint from the point that processing ceased when the agreement was reached. Specifically, Complainant alleged that the Agency failed to support its determination that she was not qualified with credible documentation and, that, consistent with the agreement, she was exercising her option to reinstate her complaint.
In its FAD, the Agency concluded that "management officials have not committed a breach of the settlement agreement." The Agency reasoned that the Agreement did not require documentation and "therefore, the issuance of findings by [HR] without documentation does not violate or breach [the] terms of the settlement agreement." The Agency stated that the "terms of the settlement agreement did not address options available to either party if a party disagreed with [the] determination."
CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL
On appeal, Complainant asserts that the terms of the Agreement permit her to reinstate her complaint. She also raises race and age claims in connection with the Agency's determination that she was not qualified for the position which was the subject of the settlement agreement. She contends that management is trying to disqualify her for a position for which she was previously qualified in order to place a younger, Caucasian employee in the position.
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 the agreement was valid and binding.
In the instant case, the parties agreed that Complainant could reinstate her complaint if HR determined in writing that Complainant did not qualify. Inasmuch as the Agreement expressly permitted Complainant the option of reinstatement of her complaint if HR determined that Complainant was not qualified and HR made that determination, we find that the terms of the Agreement should be enforced to permit the reinstatement of Complainant's complaint and the continued processing of her EEO claims. Therefore, in accordance with the Agreement, we order the reinstatement of her complaint.
In addition, to the extent that Complainant appears to be raising new allegations, if she has not already contacted an EEO Counselor, she may raise these matters as a new complaint or, alternatively, amend the remanded complaint.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, we REVERSE the Agency's Final Decision and we REMAND the matter for reinstatement of the complaint for continued processing.
ORDER (E1016)
The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108 et seq. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant that it has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision was issued. The Agency shall allow an amendment of the remanded claims and issue to Complainant a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify Complainant of the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150) calendar days of the date this decision was issued, unless the matter is otherwise resolved prior to that time. If the Complainant requests a final decision without a hearing, the Agency shall issue a final decision within sixty (60) days of receipt of Complainant's request.
A copy of the Agency's letter of acknowledgment to Complainant and a copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)
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. 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 (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 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), 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 (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 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
October 7, 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
0120161711
2
0120161711