Berenice R.,1 Complainant,v.Lisa S. Disbrow, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Feb 23, 2017

0120170301 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 23, 2017)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Berenice R.,1
Complainant,

v.

Lisa S. Disbrow,
Acting Secretary,
Department of the Air Force,
Agency.

Appeal No. 0120170301

Agency No. 9L4W15022

DECISION

Complainant filed an appeal with this Commission from a decision by the Agency dated
September 23, 2016, finding that it was in compliance with the terms of the settlement
agreement into which the parties entered.

BACKGROUND

At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as an IT Specialist at
the Agency’s Pentagon facility in Washington, D.C. Complainant contacted an Agency EEO
Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process. On December 31, 2015, Complainant and the
Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the matter.

By letter to the Agency dated August 26, 2016, 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 breached the settlement agreement
when she was required to move to a different work space. The Agency contends that it has not
breached the settlement agreement, as there is no provision in the agreement concerning
Complainant’s work area seat arrangement.

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.
0120170301

2
In its decision, the Agency concluded that Complainant provided no evidence that the Agency
violated any term of the agreement. Complainant has provided no additional arguments or
evidence on appeal.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

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 Complainant 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. Complainant 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
Complainant 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).

In the instant case, we concur with the Agency’s finding that there is no term in the settlement
agreement between the parties that governs the location of Complainant’s work space. The
settlement agreement provided in part that Complainant would be placed on a certain work
schedule. Complainant has presented no evidence to show that the Agency has breached any
provision of the settlement agreement. The Commission agrees with the Agency finding that no
breach has occurred.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, we AFFIRM the Agency decision finding that the Agency has not breached the
settlement agreement between the parties.

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 tend to
establish that:

0120170301

3
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 (S0610)

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 (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
0120170301

4
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

February 23, 2017
Date