Phillip L. Barnes, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 24, 2001
01A04777_r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 24, 2001)

01A04777_r

09-24-2001

Phillip L. Barnes, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Phillip L. Barnes v. United States Postal Service

01A04777

September 24, 2001

.

Phillip L. Barnes,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A04777

Agency No. 4D-230-0175-99

DECISION

Complainant timely appealed the agency's decision that denied his claim

that the settlement agreement entered into between the parties had

been breached.

The record reveals that on June 24, 1999, complainant and the agency

entered into a settlement agreement regarding an EEO complaint. The

settlement provided, in pertinent part, that in exchange for complainant

voluntarily withdrawing his complaint, the agency agreed as follows:

1. [Complainant's supervisor] agrees to withdraw from [complainant's]

personnel folder the Letter of Warning dated April 13, 1999 no later

than July 13, 1999.

3. [Complainant's supervisor] agrees that she will provide [complainant]

a very favorable performance rating, with no reference to the Letter of

Warning for his performance under her supervision through today.

On May 19, 2000, complainant notified the agency that it had breached the

settlement agreement. According to complainant, the Letter of Warning

was included as an exhibit in the investigative file for another EEO

complaint that he had filed. Complainant stated that an additional

Letter of Warning, dated July 22, 1999, was also improperly included in

the record of that complaint.

By agency decision dated May 31, 2000, the agency determined that it had

not breached the settlement agreement. The agency stated that the Letter

of Warning, dated April 13, 1999, was provided as comparative information

of discipline issued to craft employees in Portsmouth, Virginia in 1999.

The agency noted that the exhibit does not state that it came from

complainant's personnel records, and that complainant does not allege

that the Letter of Warning was referenced in his performance rating.

The agency stated that the settlement agreement did not provide that there

would be no reference to the Letter of Warning in any of complainant's

future EEO complaints.

On appeal, complainant argues that in a recent meeting, it was agreed

that no reference should be made to information after it is no longer

part of his official personnel folder. Complainant maintains that the

letter of warning should have been removed from all agency records.

With regard to the merits of complainant's claim of breach, we find

that the agency has not established that it complied with the settlement

agreement. Complainant claims that the agency breached the settlement

agreement by referring to his Letter of Warning, dated April 13, 1999, in

his subsequent EEO complaint. Upon review of the settlement agreement,

we note that the agreement provided that the Letter of Warning would

be removed from complainant's official personnel folder and it would

not be referenced in complainant's performance evaluation. Given that

the agency has failed to establish that the Letter of Warning was in

a location other than complainant's official personnel folder, we must

vacate the agency's decision so that a supplemental investigation can

be conducted. We note that the settlement agreement did not address

the Letter of Warning, dated July 22, 1999, that was also raised in

complainant's allegation of breach. Accordingly, the agency's decision

that it did not breach the settlement agreement is VACATED. This matter

is hereby REMANDED for further processing pursuant to the Order below.

ORDER

The agency shall determine whether the Letter of Warning, dated April 13,

1999, was located in complainant's official personnel folder at the time

that the Letter of Warning was inserted in the investigative record of

the subsequent complaint filed by complainant. The agency shall state

all of the locations of the Letter of Warning at that time. The agency

shall also determine whether the Letter of Warning is currently present

in complainant's official personnel folder. The agency shall supplement

the record with an affidavit from an official who has personal knowledge

with regard to these issues. Within thirty (30) calendar days of the date

this decision becomes final, the agency shall either reissue a decision

refusing to reinstate the complaint or issue a letter to complainant

informing him that the agency is reinstating his complaint from the

point processing ceased.

A copy of the agency's new decision and/or letter to complainant informing

him of the resumption of processing of his complaint, as appropriate,

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 (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

September 24, 2001

__________________

Date