Xi Dan, Complainant,v.Michael O Leavitt, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 29, 2008
0120070114 (E.E.O.C. May. 29, 2008)

0120070114

05-29-2008

Xi Dan, Complainant, v. Michael O Leavitt, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Agency.


Xi Dan,

Complainant,

v.

Michael O Leavitt,

Secretary,

Department of Health and Human Services,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120070114

Agency No. NCIEE020040014

DECISION

JURISDICTION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final

decision (FAD) by the agency dated September 5, 2006, finding that it

was in compliance with the terms of the November 2, 2005 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.

The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:

(5) If complainant returns to OCR upon the completion of her detail,

she understands that she will be placed in a permanent position of the

Agency's choosing in a work environment in Bethesda or Rockville which

is suitable for her skills, knowledge, and career development at the

same grade and pay as when she left NCI to begin the detail, with the

mutual understanding that she will not return to the Neuro-Oncology

branch under the supervision of [two named supervisors].

(12) The agency agrees to change the charge of AWOL for one and a

half hours on March 23, 2005 to leave without pay (LWOP) and expunge

all records reflecting the charge of AWOL for March 23, 2005.

(18) When contacted regarding complainant, [named official], will

provide the pre-agreed reference letter enclosed as appendix with this

settlement, and will make no further comment regarding complainant's

tenure with the Center for Cancer Research.

By letter to the agency dated August 4, 2006, complainant alleged that

the agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that

the agency specifically implement its terms. Specifically, complainant

alleged that the agency failed to place her in a position of the agency's

choosing, did not provide the reference letter, and did not expunge her

records.

In its September 5, 2006 FAD, the agency concluded it was in compliance

with the settlement agreement. The agency provided evidence that it

had placed complainant in a position in the CCR, laboratory of receptor

Biology and Gene Expression, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer

Institute at the same pay and grade. However, complainant stated that

she was unable to do the job because of her medical condition. The agency

indicated that it was willing to work with complainant to determine if

she needed reasonable accommodation. The agency further provided copies

of the letter to be sent as a reference and provided an email certifying

that the AWOL was expunged. Complainant asserts these actions were done

in an untimely fashion.

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. Department of Defense,

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. Department 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. United States Postal

Service, 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, regarding complainant's placement in the new

position, the Commission finds that the agency acted in accordance

with the settlement agreement. Neither the settlement agreement nor

the complaint on which it was based made mention of any disability or

medical condition. In addition, complainant does not explain what her

medical condition is, why the job into which she was placed does not meet

her medical restrictions, or what kind of accommodation she would need.

To that extent, the agency is obligated to work with complainant to

determine the appropriate reasonable accommodation and has indicated it

is doing so.

With respect to the issue of the agency not acting within the times frames

called for in the agreement, the Commission finds that no evidence has

been presented that such delays harmed complainant and the actions have

been accomplished regarding the change from AWOL to LWOP and the letter

of reference.

The Commission finds that the agency is in compliance with the settlement

agreement.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0408)

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 (S0408)

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 (Z0408)

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

May 29, 2008

__________________

Date

2

0120070114

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120070114