Michael Cornelius, Complainant,v.John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 11, 2013
0120132132 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 11, 2013)

0120132132

09-11-2013

Michael Cornelius, Complainant, v. John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.


Michael Cornelius,

Complainant,

v.

John M. McHugh,

Secretary,

Department of the Army,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120132132

Agency No. ARJACKSON12AUG03376

DECISION

Complainant filed an appeal concerning a 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

At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Maintenance Worker at the Agency's Imboden School Age Center in Fort Jackson, South Carolina.

Believing that the Agency subjected him to unlawful discrimination, Complainant contacted an Agency EEO Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process. Complainant filed an EEO complaint on September 26, 2012, alleging he was discriminated against based on his sex and reprisal when he was subjected to harassment that created a hostile work environment. He listed five incidents of harassment by his first line supervisor. His allegations involved being refused the purchase of supplies and materials for work; being confronted in a rude manner; being stalked in a staff training room; being denied the opportunity to provide his supervisor with a weekly work plan; and being denied the right to get a price quote from a Lowe's store. On March 14, 2013, the Agency accepted an amendment to the complaint, involving a memorandum he received from his second line supervisor.

On March 27, 2013, the parties entered into a negotiated settlement agreement. Therein the Agency agreed to change Complainant's first and second-level supervisors, so that the second-level supervisor would serve as Complainant's first level supervisor and the first-level would serve as Complainant's second-level supervisor. In return, Complainant agreed to "withdraw his formal EEO complaint dated September 26, 2012, as amended on March 13, 2013." The agreement set forth the claims in the complaint and the amendment.

On March 30, 2013, Complainant filed the instant appeal with the Commission, seeking rescission of the settlement agreement due to a "unilateral mistake." Complainant states that the claims against his second level supervisor were not discussed during the fact-finding conference were the agreement was made.

The Agency did not issue a decision on the matter. However, in the interest of judicial efficiency, we will view its response to the appeal as its decision. The Agency states that the agreement should be upheld, noting that the agreement covered all of the incidents alleged by Complainant to be discriminatory, in both the original complaint and the amendment. The Agency stated it gave Complainant ample time to read and review the agreement.

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).

In the instant case, we find no reason to rescind the settlement agreement. The agreement specifically mentions the original EEO complaint and amendment and sets forth the claims. Complainant does not allege or present evidence that he was coerced into signing the agreement. Rather he relies on a "unilateral mistake." However, he has not established that such a mistake occurred. Given the explicit language in the agreement, we find it covers the issues in the complaint and the amendment.

Accordingly we AFFIRM the Agency's decision not to rescind the agreement.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0610)

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), at 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 77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 (Z0610)

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 from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also 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 with the Court 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

September 11, 2013

__________________

Date

2

0120132132

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120132132