01992959
02-08-2000
Mercedes P. Dickerson, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Mercedes P. Dickerson, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01992959
) Agency No. 1G741005598
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
____________________________________)
DECISION
On February 22, 1999, complainant timely appealed the February 1, 1999
final decision (FAD). The agency found that it was in compliance with
the terms of the September 3, 1998 settlement agreement between the
complainant and the agency.<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:
(1) complainant would receive a casual mail handler appointment until
January 1, 1999;
(2) complainant would receive a casual clerk appointment on January 1,
1999;
(3) complainant would receive another casual clerk appointment contingent
upon work performance, attendance, and satisfactory evaluation by her
supervisors other than her former two supervisors;
(4) all casual appointments would be on Tour II; and
all appointments were contingent upon authorization for appointments
at the Tulsa Post Office.
By letter to the agency dated December 20, 1998, the complainant alleged
that the agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and she
requested that the agency specifically implement the settlement terms.
Specifically, the complainant alleged that the agency failed to comply
with the terms of the agreement when the agency fired her on December
16, 1998 and did not relocate the alleged sexual harasser prior to her
termination. In its February 1, 1999 FAD, the agency concluded that
all conditions of the settlement were honored throughout the term of
her appointment.
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.
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 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 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 agreement only addresses the complainant's
appointments, evaluations, and attorney's fees. The agreement appears
to be plain and unambiguous. Since the settlement agreement did
not expressly intend to address the complainant's termination or
the relocation of the alleged harasser, the Commission finds that
the agency did not breach the settlement agreement. However, 64
Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,660 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter cited as
29 C.F.R. �1614.504(c))provides that allegations that subsequent acts
of discrimination violate a settlement agreement shall be processed
as separate complaints under 64 Fed. Reg.37,644, 37, 656(1999)(to be
codified and hereinafter cited as 29 C.F.R.�1614.106), rather than as a
breach of a settlement agreement. Complainant is advised that, if she
has not already done so, she should promptly contact an EEO Counselor
if she wishes to pursue this claim through the EEO process.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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). 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).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S1199)
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:
02/08/00 ____________________________
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 Assistant1On 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.