Pablo A. Rodriguezv.Department of the Army 01A22130 July 30, 2002 . Pablo A. Rodriguez, Complainant, v. Thomas E. White, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 30, 2002
01a22130_r (E.E.O.C. Jul. 30, 2002)

01a22130_r

07-30-2002

Pablo A. Rodriguez v. Department of the Army 01A22130 July 30, 2002 . Pablo A. Rodriguez, Complainant, v. Thomas E. White, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.


Pablo A. Rodriguez v. Department of the Army

01A22130

July 30, 2002

.

Pablo A. Rodriguez,

Complainant,

v.

Thomas E. White,

Secretary,

Department of the Army,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A22130

Agency No. ACFRFO0201C0020

DECISION

The record indicates that on August 30, 2001, the parties entered into

a settlement agreement which provided, in pertinent part, that:

The Agency agrees:

Management will conduct a Desk Audit on the Complainant's position,

GS-0645-04, within sixty (60) days from the date the last signature is

affixed this document.

To rotate all civil service GS employees in the Phlebotomy Department

within the Phlebotomy Processing Area, Brooke Army Medical Center,

Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

On November 22, 2001, complainant alleged that the agency breached the

terms of the settlement agreement. On February 5, 2002, the agency

stated that it did not breach the settlement agreement. In the record,

the agency submitted the report of the desk audit, dated September 21,

2001, confirming complainant's position as a GS-04. With regard to the

alleged rotation, the agency indicated that the Phlebotomy Department's

personnel were rotated through the four major areas comprising the

Phlebotomy/Processing Section in which they were fully trained competent.

On appeal, complainant, disputing the accuracy of the desk audit,

contends that two people in the Phlebotomy Department were not rotated

within the Phlebotomy Processing Area due to their pending status to

complete training.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504 provides that if the complainant

believes that the agency failed to comply with the terms of a settlement

agreement, the complainant should notify the Director of Equal Employment

Opportunity, in writing, of the alleged noncompliance with the settlement

agreement, within thirty (30) days of when the complainant knew or should

have known of the alleged noncompliance. The complainant may request that

the terms of the settlement agreement be specifically implemented or,

alternatively, that the complaint be reinstated for further processing

from the point processing ceased.

The agency shall resolve the matter and respond to the complainant,

in writing. If the agency has not responded to the complainant, in

writing, or if the complainant is not satisfied with the agency's attempt

to resolve the matter, the complainant may appeal to the Commission for

a determination as to whether the agency has complied with the terms of

the settlement agreement or final decision.

The Commission has held that settlement agreements are contracts between

the complainant and the agency and it is the intent of the parties

as expressed in the contract, and not some unexpressed intention, that

controls the contract's construction. Eggleston v. Department of Veterans

Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05900795 (August 23, 1990). In addition, the

Commission generally follows the rule that if a 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 v. Building Engineering Services,

730 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1984). The Commission has followed this rule

when interpreting settlement agreements. The Commission's policy in

this regard is based on the premise that the face of the agreement best

reflects the understanding of the parties.

The record indicates that the agency properly conducted a desk audit

on complainant's position in September 2001. Although complainant is

dissatisfied with the outcome of the desk audit, the Commission notes that

the settlement agreement did not guarantee his expected position upgrade.

Therefore, we find that the agency has complied with provision 3(a)

of the settlement agreement.

With regard to the alleged rotation at issue in provision 3(b) of the

settlement agreement, the agency stated that the Phlebotomy Department's

personnel were rotated within the Phlebotomy Processing Area. However,

there is insufficient evidence in the record to show that whether all

civil service GS employees in the Phlebotomy Department were completely

rotated within the Phlebotomy Processing Area. For instance, the record

shows that some employees' rotation were in �progress� or were �pending�

and others were �n/a.� It is not clear if all of these employees were

civil service GS employees or whether they have been completely rotated

in the Phlebotomy Department within the Phlebotomy Processing Area.

Therefore, the agency is Ordered, as stated below, to conduct a

supplemental investigation concerning the matter.

The agency's decision finding no breach of provision 3(a) of the

settlement agreement is AFFIRMED. The agency's decision finding no

breach of provision 3(b) is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED to the

agency's for further processing in accordance with the Order herein.

ORDER

The agency shall supplement its record to include evidence showing

whether it has complied with provision 3(b) of the August 30, 2001

settlement agreement, i.e., by rotating all civil service GS employees

in the Phlebotomy Department within the Phlebotomy Processing Area,

Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas. Based on the

foregoing information, the agency, within thirty (30) calendar days of

the date this decision becomes final, shall issue a decision regarding

whether the agency breached provision 3(b) of the settlement agreement.

A copy of the agency's decision must be sent to the Compliance Officer

as 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 (T0900)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision/action in part, but it

also requires the agency to continue its administrative processing of a

portion of your complaint. 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 on both that portion

of your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that portion

of the complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative

processing. 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 your appeal with the Commission, until

such time as the agency issues its final decision on your complaint.

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

July 30, 2002

__________________

Date