Gloria G. Jalali, Complainant.v.Dr. James G. Roche, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 26, 2004
01A41893_r (E.E.O.C. Jul. 26, 2004)

01A41893_r

07-26-2004

Gloria G. Jalali, Complainant. v. Dr. James G. Roche, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.


Gloria G. Jalali v. Department of the Air Force

01A41893

July 26, 2004

.

Gloria G. Jalali,

Complainant.

v.

Dr. James G. Roche,

Secretary,

Department of the Air Force,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A41893

Agency No. RF0D03032L04

DECISION

Complainant appeals to the Commission from the agency's February 9, 2004

decision finding no breach of the settlement agreement. On October 28,

2003, the parties resolved complainant's complaints by entering into a

settlement agreement, which provided, in pertinent part, that complainant

would receive the following:

The Agency will expunge and hold in abeyance until her December 2003

permanent change of station (PCS) the following documents from the

Complainant's supervisor's personnel record (971 file) and/or official

personnel file (OPF):

AF Form 860B, Civilian Progress Review Worksheet signed 1 Nov 02;

AF Form 860B, Civilian Progress Review Worksheet signed 20 Oct 03;

Letter of Counseling dated 26 Aug 03, Subject: Failure to Accomplish

Assigned Tasks; and

Letter of Reprimand, which will be administered to the Complainant

for continually failing to accomplish assigned tasks, specifically

relating to the Native American Heritage Committee activities.

(b) The agency agrees not to provide any information and or comments

to the gaining supervisor. If input is solicited, the only information

that can be provided is the dates she worked for the Agency . . .

By letter to the agency dated November 27, 2003, complainant alleged that

the agency was in breach of the settlement agreement. Specifically,

complainant alleged that the agency breached the settlement agreement

when on November 6, 2003, �[Ms. X] brought up an issue� relating to

complainant's failure to perform assigned duties on November 5, 2003.

Complainant states that at the end of this meeting, �[Ms. X] told each of

the MEO advisors to write memos on what had occurred.� Complainant argues

that these events were �deliberate efforts to continue the retaliation�

and disregard the settlement agreement.

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).

We find that complainant has not shown breach of the settlement agreement.

The settlement agreement contains no language precluding the agency from

discussing complainant's failure to perform assigned duties subsequent

to the settlement agreement. Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(c),

subsequent acts of discrimination shall be processed as separate

complaints. If complainant believes the actions on November 6, 2003

to be a subsequent act of discrimination, complainant may contact an

EEO Counselor pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105 to file a new complaint.

The Commission does not address in this decision whether such actions

complained of by complainant would state a claim of discrimination.

The agency's decision finding no breach of the settlement agreement

is AFFIRMED.

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

July 26, 2004

__________________

Date