Kenneth M. Harris, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 24, 2002
01A22673_r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 24, 2002)

01A22673_r

09-24-2002

Kenneth M. Harris, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Kenneth M. Harris v. United States Postal Service

01A22673

September 24, 2002

.

Kenneth M. Harris,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A22673

Agency Nos. 4E-995-0034-99

4E-995-0015-00

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the final

agency decision dated March 20, 2002, regarding a claimed breach of an

oral settlement agreement. The issue presented on appeal is whether the

parties entered into a binding settlement agreement.

Complainant contends that the parties entered into an oral settlement

agreement regarding two EEO complaints: Agency Nos. 4E-995-0034-99

and 4E-995-0015-00. Complainant alleged that the agency breached the

settlement agreement when it failed to pay him $60,000 in settlement of

his complaints, as purportedly provided by the oral agreement. In its

decision, the agency found that there was no formal written settlement

agreement, and refused complainant's request to implement the purported

oral agreement.

Upon review of the record and the arguments of both parties, we find

that there was no binding settlement agreement. The record reveals

that the purported agreement was not reduced to writing as required

by 29 C.F.R. 1614.603. The Commission has only upheld the validity of

a settlement agreement entered into orally in one type of situation,

i.e., when a verbal agreement is reached during a hearing before an EEOC

Administrative Judge. Acree v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Request

No. 05900784 (October 4, 1990). In upholding the validity of the oral

agreement in Acree, the Commission relied on the fact that the hearing

transcript evidenced the agreement between the parties.

In the present case, there is no writing to rely on, nor do we have a

hearing transcript or its equivalent on which to bind the parties. With

regard to complainant's claim that a document faxed by him to the

agency evidenced the existence of an agreement, we determine that the

referenced document was merely complainant's proposal to settle and

does not evidence a final agreement between the parties. We note that

on appeal, complainant acknowledges that �the agency's representative

refused to sign� his proposed agreement. EEOC Regulations require not

only that settlement agreements be written, but also that they be signed

by both parties. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.603. Absent written confirmation

of the terms of an agreement, the Commission is unable to enforce a

settlement agreement. Therefore, the agency's decision finding that

there was no binding 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

September 24 ,2002

__________________

Date