01997258_r
06-20-2001
Darrie L. Walton, Complainant, v. Ann M. Veneman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.
Darrie L. Walton v. Department of Agriculture
01997258
June 20, 2001
.
Darrie L. Walton,
Complainant,
v.
Ann M. Veneman,
Secretary,
Department of Agriculture,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01997258
Agency No. 940110
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final
decision by the agency dated September 10, 1999 dismissing complainant's
breach of settlement claim and finding that it lacked jurisdiction
over the May 13, 1993 settlement agreement into which the parties<1>
entered. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part,
that it �constitutes a settlement agreement of any and all disputes,
EEO complaints, grievances, and issues between [complainant] and [the
agency],� and that complainant will be reassigned to the Management
Administrative Staff and �trained in the tasks of the position within
the first 30 days.�
On October 30, 1997, complainant contacted an EEO Counselor and alleged,
along with other matters, that the agency was in breach of the settlement
agreement, a reiteration of a claim she first made to the EEO office
in 1994. Specifically, complainant alleged that the agency denied her
training outlined in the May 13, 1993 agreement.
After review of the record in the instant case, we find that the May 13,
1993 settlement agreement was a grievance settlement reached under
the parties Collective Bargaining Agreement. Although the agreement
settled �all disputes, EEO complaints, grievances, and issues� between
the parties, there is no evidence in the record that complainant
had any formal or informal EEO complaints pending at the time of the
agreement, or that any issues settled in the agreement were other than
those related to complainant's grievance issues. The Commission has
held that a complainant may not use the EEO process to obtain compliance
with a grievance settlement. See Quezada v. United States Postal Service,
EEOC Request No. 05930175 (August 12, 1993). The Commission finds that
complainant has here attempted to use the EEO process to obtain compliance
with a grievance agreement. Such a noncompliance claim is outside the
purview of the EEO process. Therefore, we find that complainant's breach
of settlement claim was properly dismissed.
Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss complainant's claim is
hereby AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0900)
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
June 20, 2001
__________________
Date
1The settlement agreement was reached by
complainant and the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA), a sub-agency
of the Department of Agriculture. As a result of a post-agreement
reorganization, FmHA is now known as �Rural Development.�