Brenda K. Smith, Complainant,v.Gordon R. England, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 17, 2002
01A04907_r (E.E.O.C. Apr. 17, 2002)

01A04907_r

04-17-2002

Brenda K. Smith, Complainant, v. Gordon R. England, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Brenda K. Smith v. Department of the Navy

01A04907

April 17, 2002

.

Brenda K. Smith,

Complainant,

v.

Gordon R. England,

Secretary,

Department of the Navy,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A04907

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final

decision by the agency dated July 6, 2000, finding that it was in

compliance with the terms of the April 4, 1994 settlement agreement into

which the parties entered.

The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:

ACTIVITY COMMITMENT: The Commander Naval Base agrees to offer the

complainant the following:

to comply with medical recommendations pertaining to the complainant's

physical disability (hand injury) in accordance with Title I of the

Americans with Disabilities Act which explains that:

discrimination is prohibited against any qualified individual with

a disability in regard to all terms, conditions and privileges of

employment;

the qualified individual with a disability is defined as an individual

who satisfies the requisite skill, experience, education, and other

job-related requirements of the employment position that the individual

holds, and who with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform

the essential functions (job tasks that are fundamental) to the position.

to display the appropriate information concerning the Federal Sector

Complaint Processing Under 29 CFR Part 1614 which explains the Complaint

Process and gives the point of contact for information pertaining to

said Acts.

the Commander Naval Base, Norfolk acknowledges its obligation under

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended 42 U.S.C. section

2000e-16, not to take reprisal against the complainant for her filing

a complaint.

By letter to the agency dated June 2, 2000, 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 required complainant to shoot more rounds at

a shooting range session (pistol and shotgun ranges) than her doctor's

medical restrictions permitted.

In its July 6, 2000 decision, the agency concluded that complainant

did not advise the range master "that she could not fire the shotgun

ranges during the same session that she shot a pistol range." The agency

also found that complainant's most recent medical documentation (1997)

did not include a restriction against complainant's firing a shotgun.

Nudum pactum

The Commission has stated the following concerning the issue of

consideration: Generally the adequacy or fairness of the consideration

in a settlement agreement is not at issue, as long some legal detriment

is incurred as part of the bargain. When, however, one of the contracting

parties incurs no legal detriment, the settlement agreement will be set

aside for lack of consideration. MacNair v. United States Postal Service,

EEOC Appeal No. 01964653 (July 1, 1997); Juhola v. Department of the Army,

EEOC Appeal No. 01934032 (June 30, 1994) (citing Terracina v. Department

of Health and Human Services, EEOC Request No. 05910888 (March 11, 1992)).

In the instant case, pursuant to the settlement agreement, the agency

agreed that it would abide by and promulgate the anti-discrimination laws

the agency is already required to uphold. Complainant, in turn, agreed

to withdraw her EEO discrimination claim. We find that the agency,

in merely agreeing to treat complainant in accordance with existing

statutes and regulations, provided complainant nothing more than that

to which she was entitled as an employee, and accordingly, she received

no consideration for her agreement to withdraw her EEO claim. Based on

the foregoing, we find that the settlement agreement is unenforceable;

thus, the agency should reinstate complainant's EEO matter for further

processing from the point processing ceased.

The agency's final decision is VACATED and we REMAND the matter to

the agency for further processing at the point where processing of the

settled matter previously ceased.

ORDER

The agency shall reinstate the settled matter and resume processing the

matter from the point processing ceased pursuant to 29 C.F.R. Part 1614.

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

notify complainant that it has reinstated the settled matter. A copy

of the letter to complainant 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 (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

April 17, 2002

__________________

Date