Barbara B. Kowalewska, Complainant,v.John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 5, 2012
0120113529 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 5, 2012)

0120113529

12-05-2012

Barbara B. Kowalewska, Complainant, v. John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.


Barbara B. Kowalewska,

Complainant,

v.

John M. McHugh,

Secretary,

Department of the Army,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120113529

Agency No. ARLEWIS09SEP04452

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final decision (FAD) by the Agency dated June 22, 2011, finding that it was in compliance with the terms of the 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

Believing that the Agency subjected her to unlawful discrimination, Complainant contacted an Agency EEO Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process. On January 27, 2011, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:

The Agency agrees:

(b) that when applicable and within mission requirements, to assign Complainant to work an end window in the Main Pharmacy such that she will be exposed to only on adjacent window in order to minimize exposure to fragrance and respiratory irritants; these windows are currently labeled window #1 and window #6.

(d) to make a standard chair available for [Complainant's] use when needed to perform the duties of her position.

By letter to the Agency dated May 14, 2011, 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 provide her with a chair. Complainant asserted that all of the chairs in the Pharmacy "were broken and unsafe to use." Complainant stated she injured herself on March 4, 2011 using a defective chair. Complainant also stated she was "almost exclusively assigned the duty", standing on her feet for hours while jobs at the windows were available to others.

In its June 22, 2011 FAD, the Agency concluded it was not in breach of the agreement. The Agency provided numerous statements indicating that on March 15, 2011 Complainant notified a management official that the chair she was provided was not working properly. The management person stated that the chair was not broken, but that he told Complainant that he would look into getting her an ergonomic chair. Complainant was told she could use another chair from the pharmacy area. The Agency noted that the only reference to working windows was that 1b provision which said Complainant would be assigned to end windows. The Agency noted that since March 18, 2011, Complainant has not returned to work.

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, the Commission finds that the Agency has not breached the agreement. When Complainant reported the broken chair to the supervisor, he tested it and determined it was not broken, and offered complainant another chair. He also offered to look into an ergonomic chair for Complainant. However, Complainant left work on March 18, 2011 and the Agency was never given an opportunity to remedy the situation.1 Further the agreement is silent as to how much standing or sitting she would do.

Accordingly, the Agency's decision finding that it was not in breach of the agreement is AFFIRMED.

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

December 5, 2012

__________________

Date

1 According to the Agency's brief on appeal, Complainant filed an application for disability retirement on September 2011.

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

2

0120113529

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120113529