0120091638
06-18-2009
Lavetta R. Parnell-Brockman, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Lavetta R. Parnell-Brockman,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120091638
Agency No. 1H371000308
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final
decision (FAD) by the agency dated February 17, 2009, finding that it
was in compliance with the terms of the January 15, 2008 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.
The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
We the parties agree that [named individual] will call [named individual]
in Injury Compensation about all pay adjustments pertaining to OWCP.
The parties further agree that when the proper information is received
any pay adjustments made, a copy will be given to [complainant.] This is
a complete settlement of case #1H-371-0003-08. The parties agree that
should there be any dispute with payment that all parties will review
the information before the issue is resolved.
By letter to the agency dated May 29, 2008, complainant alleged that the
agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that the
agency specifically implement its terms. Specifically, in her allegation
of breach dated May 29, 2008, complainant asserted, without elaborating,
that the agency did not do what it agreed to in the January 15, 2008
settlement agreement.
In its February 17, 2009 FAD, the agency concluded that the agency
complied with the terms of the agreement. Specifically, the agency
indicated that OWCP will only provide continuation of pay (COB) benefits
for medical leave documented by a physician. The agency asserts that
complainant was informed that when she provided proper documentation in
the form of notes signed by her doctor, all appropriate OWCP payments
would be made. In its final decision, the agency points out that proper
documentation was submitted for complainant's medical condition for
October 27, 2007, and from November 5, 2007 through November 11, 2007.
As a result, the record indicates that a pay adjustment was made to
complainant's salary accordingly. The Commission further finds that
the agreement only obligated the agency to call the Injury Compensation
office regarding pay adjustments, to provide complainant with a copy of
any pay adjustment made, and to review information before any dispute
over payment is resolved.
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).
In the instant case, the Commission finds that complainant has failed
to demonstrate that the agency breached the terms of the agreement as
alleged. Specifically, the Commission finds that the agency performed its
obligations under the contract with respect to executing a pay adjustment
upon receipt of proper documentation of her injury. Complainant has
not presented evidence to persuade the Commission that the agency has
breached the January 15, 2008 settlement agreement between the parties.
In that regard, the Commission affirms the agency's determination that
it complied with the settlement agreement at issue herein.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1208)
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 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 (S0408)
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 (Z1008)
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
June 18, 2009
__________________
Dat
2
0120091638
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
4
0120091638