01995046
05-09-2000
Jill L. Thomas, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Jill L. Thomas, )
Complainant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01995046
) Agency No. 4-D-400-0023-99
)
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
______________________________)
DECISION
Complainant timely appealed the agency's decision not to reinstate
her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination that the parties
had settled.<1> See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659-37,660 (1999) (to
be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.402(a),
� 1614.405, and � 1614.504).
The record indicates that complainant filed a pre-complaint on December
18, 1998, which was settled during mediation. The settlement agreement,
dated January 14, 1999, provided, in part, that complainant would be
paid $88.24 for �punitive� damages; she would be allowed to continue to
do her bid job; and she would be treated the same as the male employees.
On February 22, 1999, complainant contacted an EEO Counselor alleging that
the agency failed to comply with the terms of the settlement agreement.
Specifically, complainant indicated that it was important to her that
she continued to do her bid job under the terms of the settlement
agreement since she was concerned that her job might be abolished.
Complainant alleged that after the settlement agreement, her work schedule
was changed twice; her immediate supervisor was changed; and her FMLA
was denied. The record indicates that on March 30, 1999, complainant,
subsequently, filed a formal complaint concerning these matters in Agency
No. 4-D-400-0063-99, which is pending before the agency.
On July 27, 1999, the agency issued its decision finding that it did not
breach the settlement agreement. The agency stated that complainant
received $88.24 payment in accordance with the settlement agreement,
and her new claims were pending before the agency.
EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504 provides that if the complainant
believes that the agency failed to comply with the terms of a settlement
agreement, the complainant should notify the Director of Equal Employment
Opportunity, in writing, of the alleged noncompliance with the settlement
agreement, within thirty (30) days of when the complainant knew or should
have known of the alleged noncompliance. The complainant may request that
the terms of the settlement agreement be specifically implemented or,
alternatively, that the complaint be reinstated for further processing
from the point processing ceased.
The agency shall resolve the matter and respond to the complainant,
in writing. If the agency has not responded to the complainant, in
writing, or if the complainant is not satisfied with the agency's attempt
to resolve the matter, the complainant may appeal to the Commission for
a determination as to whether the agency has complied with the terms of
the settlement agreement or final decision.
The Commission has held that settlement agreements are contracts between
the complainant and the agency and it is the intent of the parties
as expressed in the contract, and not some unexpressed intention, that
controls the contract's construction. Eggleston v. Department of Veterans
Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05900795 (August 23, 1990). In addition, the
Commission generally follows the rule that if a 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 v. Building Engineering Services,
730 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1984). The Commission has followed this rule
when interpreting settlement agreements. The Commission's policy in
this regard is based on the premise that the face of the agreement best
reflects the understanding of the parties.
Upon review, the Commission finds that the agency did not breach
the settlement agreement. Specifically, the Commission finds that
complainant's claims concerning her work schedule, change of her
immediate supervisor, and her FMLA are beyond the scope of the terms of
the settlement agreement. The settlement agreement did not provide for
these matters which are new subsequent incidents. The record reflects
that the agency is properly processing these matters under a separate
complaint. The Commission notes that complainant, acknowledging her
receipt of $88.24, does not allege that she was not allowed to continue
her bid job pursuant to the settlement agreement.
Complainant admitted receiving the $88.24 payment due under the settlement
agreement, but argues that she did not receive such payment until 12 weeks
after the agreement was entered into by the parties. The Commission finds
that the settlement agreement did not specify when the $88.24 payment
would be made. The Commission finds that even if the payment was not
made until 12 weeks after the agreement was entered into, such a period
of time is reasonable and does not constitute breach of the agreement.
There is no evidence of bad faith by the agency in the record.
Accordingly, the agency's decision not to reinstate the settled matter
is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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 64
Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred
to as 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 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).
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)
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:
May 9, 2000
DATE
Carlton
M.
Hadden,
Acting
Director
Office of Federal Operations
1On November 9, 1999, revised
regulations governing the EEOC's federal sector complaint process
went into effect. These regulations apply to all federal sector
EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative process.
Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations found
at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.