Lillian F. Sandle, Complainant,v.Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 2, 2000
01995141 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 2, 2000)

01995141

08-02-2000

Lillian F. Sandle, Complainant, v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Lillian F. Sandle v. Department of Veterans Affairs

01995141

August 2, 2000

Lillian F. Sandle, )

Complainant, )

)

v. )

) Appeal No. 01995141

Togo D. West, Jr., )

Secretary, )

Department of Veterans Affairs, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DECISION

On June 6, 1999, complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission

from a final decision (FAD) by the agency dated April 26, 1999, finding

that it was in compliance with the terms of the April 2, 1997 settlement

agreement into which the parties entered.<1> See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644,

37,659, 37,660 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as EEOC

Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.402); 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(b); EEOC Order

No. 960, as amended.

The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:

2. The Department of Veterans Affairs and the Denver VAMC agree to the

following:

a. Compensate [complainant] in the amount of $50,000.00

b. Destroy all negative documents in agency files relating to conduct

or performance issues.

c. Priority placement within six months from the date of this agreement

into a position (from the list of positions provided by the complainant)

that is to be filled by VAMC Denver. She must meet the minimum

qualifications and physical requirements of the position

e. That the complainant will provide VAMC Denver with updated medical

documentation identifying any and all physical restrictions.

f. The complainant will provide VAMC Denver with a list of positions

that she requested to be considered for.

g. That the complainant will provide VAMC Denver with an updated

employment application, i.e., SF 171 or resume.

h. Attorney fees $16,600.00

By letter to the agency dated September 14, 1998, complainant claimed that

the settlement agreement was entered into �under coercion, fraudulent

inducement, misrepresentation, duress, and in protest....� Complainant

argued that she was coerced by the agency and an Administrative Judge

to enter into the agreement, when they purportedly stated that most

of her complaints were not worth hearing; witnesses were waiting; her

cases were costing the government money and she needed to hurry and

make a decision. Additionally, in response to the agency's request for

additional information, complainant argued that the agency failed to

destroy all negative documents and that, although she provided a list

of twenty possible positions, she was notified that she only qualified

for a few of the positions.

The agency issued a FAD dated April 26, 1999 finding no breach of the

settlement agreement.

The regulation set forth at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be

codified and hereinafter referred to as 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 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).

The Commission notes that when complainant pursued the EEO complaint

process that led to the settlement agreement of April 2, 1997, one

of the bases of alleged discrimination that she identified was age.

The Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA), amended the ADEA,

effective October 16, 1990, and provides the minimum requirements for

waiver of ADEA claims. To meet the standards of the OWBPA, a waiver is

not considered knowing and voluntary unless, at a minimum; it is clearly

written from the viewpoint of the complainant; it specifically refers to

rights or claims under the ADEA; the complainant does not waive rights

or claims following execution of the waiver; valuable consideration is

given in exchange for the waiver; the complainant is advised, in writing,

to consult with an attorney prior to executing the agreement; and the

complainant is given a �reasonable� period of time in which to consider

the agreement. 29 U.S.C. � 626(f)(2). See Juhola v. Department of the

Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01934032 (June 30, 1994).

In the instant case, the settlement agreement provides in part that

complainant would withdraw her complaints and waive �all pending

administrative procedures and filings which are or may be filed in

relation� to the complaints. However, the settlement agreement does not

specifically state that complainant was waiving her rights or claims

under the ADEA as required by the OWBPA. Moreover, the agency did not

advise complainant in writing to consult with an attorney prior to

executing the settlement agreement. Furthermore, there appears to be

some question as to whether complainant was provided with a �reasonable�

period of time in which to consider the agreement since it was executed

immediately after two days of �extensive settlement negotiations.� We

therefore conclude that complainant's waiver of her ADEA rights under

the settlement agreement was not knowing or voluntary. Accordingly,

we determine that the settlement agreement is invalid. See Hopkins

v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01953389 (September 1, 1995);

request to reconsider denied, EEOC Request No. 05960016 (February 20,

1998).

The Commission also determines that complainant's retention of any

consideration she may have received under the settlement agreement is no

impediment to the reinstatement of her ADEA claims against the agency.

See Oubre v. Entergy Operations Inc., ____U.S.____ 118 C. Ct. 838

(1998). Moreover, complainant is advised that if she prevails on her EEO

complaints, any monetary award may be subject to offset by consideration

that she has already received from the agency. See Oubre, id. Therefore,

the Commission determines that the agency improperly declined to reinstate

complainant's complaints.

Accordingly, the agency's finding of no breach of the settlement agreement

of April 2, 1997 is REVERSED. The matter is REMANDED to the agency for

further processing in accordance with the ORDER below.

ORDER

The agency is ORDERED to reinstate complainant's EEO complaints and

other related matters that may have purportedly been disposed of by the

settlement agreement of April 2, 1997, at the point which processing

ceased. The agency shall acknowledge to complainant that it has resumed

processing complainant's complaints and other related matters within

thirty (30) calendar days of the date that this decision becomes final.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgement notifying complainant

of the reinstatement of her complaints and other related matters must

be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K1199)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)

calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The

report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to the

complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's order,

the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the right to file a

civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior

to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659-60 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408), and 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503(g). Alternatively, the complainant has the right to file a

civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph

below entitled "Right to File A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407

and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the

underlying complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. �

2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the complainant files a civil action, the

administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for

enforcement, will be terminated. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409).

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 (R0400)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court WITHIN NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date

that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action AFTER ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY (180) CALENDAR DAYS of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. 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. 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:

August 2, 2000

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

_______________ __________________________

Date Equal Employment Assistant

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.