01A20658_r
12-05-2001
Paul J. Fernandez, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Paul J. Fernandez v. United States Postal Service
01A20658
December 5, 2001
.
Paul J. Fernandez,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A20658
Agency Nos. 1-H-336-0098-98; 1-H-336-0144-01
DECISION
Complainant timely appealed the agency's October 9, 2001 decision,
which concluded that the agency had not breached the settlement
agreement between the parties. On March 16, 1999, the parties resolved
complainant's complaints by entering into a settlement agreement, which
provided, in pertinent part, that complainant would receive the following:
As of 3/16/99, [complainant] will be reassigned to tour 2, hours 0400
to 12:30; SDO Sat./Sun. For a guaranteed period of 2 yrs.
[A] third year in that schedule shall be guaranteed if the reduction
rate of the section, pay location 224, exceeds 60%.
Mrs. [X] will make every effort to contact her union in reference to
this settlement.
EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504 provides that if the complainant
believes that the agency failed to comply with the terms of a settlement
agreement, the complainant should notify the Director of Equal Employment
Opportunity, in writing, of the alleged noncompliance with the settlement
agreement, within thirty (30) days of when the complainant knew or should
have known of the alleged noncompliance. The complainant may request that
the terms of the settlement agreement be specifically implemented or,
alternatively, that the complaint be reinstated for further processing
from the point processing ceased. The agency shall resolve the matter and
respond to the complainant, in writing. If the agency has not responded
to the complainant, in writing, or if the complainant is not satisfied
with the agency's attempt to resolve the matter, the complainant may
appeal to the Commission for a determination as to whether the agency
has complied with the terms of the settlement agreement or final decision.
The Commission has held that settlement agreements are contracts between
the complainant and the agency and it is the intent of the parties
as expressed in the contract, and not some unexpressed intention, that
controls the contract's construction. Eggleston v. Department of Veterans
Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05900795 (August 23, 1990). In addition, the
Commission generally follows the rule that if a 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 v. Building Engineering Services,
730 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1984). The Commission has followed this rule
when interpreting settlement agreements. The Commission's policy in
this regard is based on the premise that the face of the agreement best
reflects the understanding of the parties.
Complainant, by undated letter, alleged that the agency breached the
settlement agreement. Specifically, complainant alleges that the agency
breached the settlement agreement when he received notices characterizing
his position as a �detail�, in the first notice, and �unencumbered� in the
second notice. Complainant argues that these characterizations, if given
effect, could jeopardize his settlement agreement. Complainant argues
that the MDO attempted to end his tour 2 duties after the first year,
in breach of provision 1 of the settlement agreement, but �management
saw through [X's] erroneous interpretation and [he] remained on tour 2.�
The agency argues that complainant worked in the assignment for 2 years,
as required by provision 1 of the settlement agreement. The agency
further argues that provision 2 of the settlement agreement was not
breached because: (1) complainant did not allege breach of the provision;
and (2) there is no indication that the reduction rate of Pay Location 224
exceeded 60%, which is a contingent factor for the agency's performance
under provision 2 of the settlement agreement.
Complainant does not argue that a specific provision of the settlement
agreement was actually breached, but that it could have been breached
by characterizing his duties in such a manner. We find that complainant
has not shown breach of the settlement agreement.
The agency's decision finding no breach of the 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
December 5, 2001
__________________
Date