Gail Sakuma, Frances Sinnema, )

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 3, 1999
01972153 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 3, 1999)

01972153

09-03-1999

Gail Sakuma, Frances Sinnema, )


Nancy Allison, Susan Runtz, )

Gail Sakuma, Frances Sinnema, )

Corry Stevens, Arlene Strong, ) Appeal Nos. 01972160,

Joyce Zuber, Melody Rasmor, ) 01972152, 01972153,

Louise Hope, ) 01972154, 01972155,

Appellants, ) 01972156, 01972157,

) 01972158 & 01972159

v. )

) Agency Nos. 94-1125 &

Togo D. West, Jr., ) 94-1132 through 94-1139

Secretary, )

Department of Veterans Affairs, )

Agency. )

___________________________________)

DISMISSAL OF APPEALS

On January 7, 1997, Nancy Allison, Susan Runtz, Gail Sakuma, Frances

Sinnema, Corry Stevens, Arlene Strong, Joyce Zuber, Melody Rasmor and

Louise Hope (appellants) each timely appealed the final decision of

the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated November 29, 1996, which

consolidated appellants' ten individual complaints and concluded they

had each not been discriminated against in violation of Title VII of the

Civil Rights Act 0f 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq., and the

Equal Pay Act of 1963, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �206(d) et seq. Appellants,

present and former employees of the Veterans Medical Center located in

Portland, Oregon, had alleged that the agency discriminated against them

on the basis of their sex (female) by its failure to pay them, as nurse

practitioners, salaries equal to those paid to physician assistants.

The record indicates that on November 14, 1995, sometime after they

had filed their EEO complaints with the agency, appellants filed a

consolidated complaint with the United States Court of Federal Claims

(Case No. 95-752C), raising the identical Equal Pay Act claim as that

alleged in their EEO complaints. Thereafter, the parties entered into

negotiations and, on July 9, 1998, entered into a Joint Stipulation For

Entry of Final Judgment in which the agency agreed to pay appellants

$100,000 in damages to:

...settle this action and resolve all of [appellants'] claims, as

of the effective date of this settlement, relating to or involving

sex discrimination in compensation and unequal compensation of nurse

practitioners and physician assistants in violation of Title VII or of

the Equal Pay Act, irrespective of whether the claims have been asserted

in this action...

Pursuant to this settlement agreement, on July 15, 1998, the Court

entered a Judgment on behalf of appellants awarding the agreed-upon

damages.

Based on foregoing, the Commission hereby dismisses the above-entitled

ten appeals pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement between

the parties and 29 C.F.R. �1614.410.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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. � l6l4.604(c).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

September 3, 1999

_________________ __________________________________

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations