0120142611
02-12-2016
Madlyn F.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Western Area), Agency.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Madlyn F.,1
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Western Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120142611
Agency No. 4E-840-0005-10
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final decision (FAD) by the Agency dated July 1, 2014, finding that it was in compliance with the terms of the 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.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Letter Carrier at the Agency's Salt Lake City facility in Salt Lake City, Utah.
On May 4, 2011, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve an EEO matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
(9) The Agency and the Complainant agree that the allegations of the instant EEO complaint, the facts of this Agreement, and all terms contained in it, shall be kept confidential and pledge not to release details of the complaint or any of the terms contained herein to any person outside the parties to this matter except to the extent necessary to effectuate the terms of the agreement, or pursuant to any legitimate court order or requirement imposed by law or to their accountants or advisers.
(10) This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement between the parties hereto and fully supersedes any and all prior agreements or understandings, written or oral, between the parties hereto pertaining to the subject matter hereof.
When reviewing her personnel record at new duty assignment, Complainant discovered documents that she believed should not have been included in her personnel records. Her new supervisor allowed Complainant to remove this information from her record and to dispose of it.
By communication to the Agency, on or around March 14, 2014, Complainant alleged that the Agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that the Agency specifically implement its terms. Specifically, Complainant alleged that the Agency failed to keep the terms of the Agreement confidential.
This dispute had also been the subject of an April 10, 2014 grievance settlement. Complainant asserts that the named responsible manager admitted to putting the documents in Complainant's file and sending them to her new station. In response to the breach allegation, Complainant's former supervisor (the named responsible management official) stated in her signed affidavit that she had no knowledge of the terms of the settlement and had not been provided a copy of the settlement.
In its July 1, 2014 FAD, the Agency concluded that there was no breach. The Agency reasoned that "there was nothing in [Complainant's] personal file revealing any information on the contents of [her] EEO and EEO settlement." The Agency referenced the signed affidavit from Complainant's supervisor stating that she was not provided a copy of the agreement and not involved in the Agreement. The Agency also concluded that Complainant's concerns "were addressed when [Complainant] was allowed to take and retain the documents from the file." The Agency determined that the settlement agreement had not been breached. This appeal followed.
ANALYSIS
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. Dep't of Def., 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. Dep't 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. U.S. Postal Serv., 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).
On appeal, Complainant asks the Commission to consider her breach claim and she argues that her appeal is not premature because she filed her appeal within thirty days of receipt of the Agency's determination.
The Agency asserts that this appeal pertains to Agency Complaint 4E-840-0005-10 and not 4E-840-0023-14, which was referenced in Complainant's appeal. The Agency contends that the appeal for complaint 4E-840-0023-14 is premature because those allegations remain pending.
We find that the Agreement was valid and binding on both parties.
The Commission has held that, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(b), an agency has 35 days from the receipt of notice of noncompliance to resolve the matter, or cure any breach that occurred. The Commission has further held that if an agency cures a breach during the 35 day period following the breach notification, it will be deemed to be in compliance. Eckholm v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120091193 (April 29, 2009).
In the instant case, we find that the Agency has provided sufficient documentation to show compliance. The Agency submitted an affidavit attesting that the named official was not involved and that, after Complainant discovered questionable documents, her new supervisor immediately permitted Complainant to remove and retain any documents which she found objectionable. There is nothing in the record that shows that the documents were provided to outside parties.
We find that to the extent that the Agency's actions constituted breach, the Agency's action (of permitting Complainant to remove the documents), and providing sufficient evidence of that response, cured any such breach. We find, therefore, that the Agency complied with the Agreement.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency's final decision finding no breach of the settlement agreement.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0815)
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 tends 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), at Chap. 9 � VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). 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 (S0610)
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 (Z0815)
If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant's Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden's signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
February 12, 2016
__________________
Date
1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant's name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission's website.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0120142611
2
0120142611