01A10945_r
03-04-2002
Anthony S. Dobbins, Complainant, v. Glenn L. McCullough, Jr., Chairman, Tennessee Valley Authority, Agency.
Anthony S. Dobbins v. Tennessee Valley Authority
01A10945
March 4, 2002
.
Anthony S. Dobbins,
Complainant,
v.
Glenn L. McCullough, Jr.,
Chairman,
Tennessee Valley Authority,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A10945
Agency No. 3593
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final
decision by the agency dated October 31, 2000, finding that it was in
compliance with the terms of the January 19, 1993<1> settlement agreement
into which the parties entered.
The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
TVA will reclassify [complainant] to a General Building Mechanic Trainee
at the 75% journey wage rate. [Complainant] will be assigned to Journey
General Building Mechanic [GBM], and when [complainant] successfully
completes the FSVS [Facilities Services] training Program being developed,
his salary will be established at the corresponding wage rate for journey
level GBM['s] based on [complainant's] statement that he has 4000 hours of
documented training to date and an anticipated 8000 hour duration for the
training program. It is expected that [complainant] will be required to
complete not more than 2 years of the program. The precise time, not to
exceed 4000 hours will be agreed upon before March 15, 1993. In addition,
it is agreed that [complainant's] salary will be adjusted at the interim
salary points established by the FSVS training program being develop[ed].
By letter to the agency dated February 2, 1999, 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 he received no credit toward the completion of the hours
requirement of the GBM FSVS program for time he was on official,
approved leave. Adding together those hours for which he contends he
should have been given credit, his incremental wage increase should
have been effective November 24, 1994, instead of February 6, 1995,
the date the agency used for calculating his back pay award. On appeal,
complainant submits the names of several co-workers he believes received
credit for official leave toward their apprenticeship hours requirements.
In its October 31, 2000 decision, the agency concluded that leave time
(holiday, annual, sick or other approved leave) is never included in the
calculation of the hours completed by employees in the apprenticeship
program and thus the agency correctly calculated the effective date of
complainant's wage increase as February 6, 1995. On appeal, the agency
submits the sworn statement of a Human Resources official verifying
the method by which workers are credited with hours completed toward
the GBM FSVS apprenticeship program.
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 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 instant case, we find nothing in the plain language of the
settlement agreement to suggest that complainant should be given
credit toward completion of the required hours for FSVS program for
federal holidays, annual, sick or other official leave he has taken.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the agency's final decision finding that the
agency did not breach the terms of the settlement agreement.
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 (S0900)
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. 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
March 4, 2002
__________________
Date
1This Agreement was last signed on January 19,
1993, but effective March 15, 1993, which date various record documents
regard as the actual date of the Agreement.