Velia L. Foster, Complainant,v.John W. Snow, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionOct 20, 2004
01a44658 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 20, 2004)

01a44658

10-20-2004

Velia L. Foster, Complainant, v. John W. Snow, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.


Velia L. Foster v. Department of the Treasury

01A44658

October 20, 2004

.

Velia L. Foster,

Complainant,

v.

John W. Snow,

Secretary,

Department of the Treasury,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A44658

DECISION

On June 9, 2004, complainant filed an appeal with the Commission

requesting that a September 8, 1998 settlement agreement be declared

invalid. The Commission accepts the appeal. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.402;

29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(b); and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(a) provides that in the event that a

complainant believes that the agency failed to comply with a settlement

agreement, the complainant shall notify the EEO Director, in writing,

of the alleged non-compliance. EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(b)

provides that if the agency does not respond to complainant in writing,

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

the complainant may appeal to the Commission for a determination.

The complainant may file such an appeal 35 days after serving the agency

with written notice of the allegation of non-compliance, but must file

an appeal within 30 days of receipt of the agency's determination.

The complainant must serve a copy of the appeal on the agency and

the agency must submit a response to the Commission within 30 days of

receiving notice of the appeal.

According to the record, complainant filed a breach claim on September

28, 1998, and the agency issued a final determination on July 8, 1999.

Therein, the agency found that it complied with the terms of the

settlement agreement at issue, and provided complainant with appeal rights

to the Commission. Commission records reflect that complainant did not

file an appeal with reference to the July 8, 1999 final determination.<1>

Furthermore, the record is devoid of any indication that complainant

filed a subsequent breach claim with the agency, or that she provided

the agency with a copy of her current appeal and appeal statement,

as mandated by the above cited regulation.

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.

A settlement agreement may be voided if one of the parties establishes

that assent was obtained by duress or coercion. See Mosley v. St. Louis

Southwest Railroad, 634 F.2d 942 (5th Cir. 1981); Hodge v. Department

of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01954577 (December 7, 1995). In addition,

misrepresentation as to facts relevant to the complaint may cause the

Commission to set aside a settlement agreement. See Wolf v. U.S. Postal

Service, EEOC Request No. 05900417 (June 14, 1990).

Notwithstanding the above circumstances, even in considering the arguments

raised by complainant on appeal, i.e., that she signed the settlement

agreement due to "fear," and was "coerced and betrayed" into signing the

settlement agreement, we find that she presents no evidence to support

her contentions.<2> Complainant avers that the agency misled her into

believing that the settlement agreement guaranteed her approval for

disability retirement; however, we note that the settlement agreement

contains a provision which expressly states: "Complainant also fully

understands that the OPM [Office of Personnel Management] has approval

authority over the application for disability retirement."

The settlement agreement also contains a provision which states:

"The complainant has been given a reasonable amount of time to consider

this agreement before signing it, and advised to consult an attorney if

he/she desired." Additionally, we find that complainant's failure to

file an appeal after the agency rendered its July 8, 1999 determination,

and her nearly five-year delay since that time to pursue this matter,

further belies her claims.

Therefore, for the reasons set forth above, we find that complainant has

failed to show that the settlement agreement should be declared void

due to duress or misrepresentation, and we find that the settlement

agreement at issue is valid and enforceable.

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 (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

October 20, 2004

__________________

Date

1We note that the record contains no evidence, such as a certificate of

mailing or a signed and dated certified service receipt, to demonstrate

when complainant received the July 8, 1999 final determination.

2We note that complainant, who indicates that she is profoundly deaf,

admits that the agency provided her with effective sign language services

during the negotiation of her settlement agreement.