Robert L. Foster, Complainant,v.Hershel W. Gober, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 24, 2000
01A04576 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 24, 2000)

01A04576

11-24-2000

Robert L. Foster, Complainant, v. Hershel W. Gober, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Robert L. Foster v. Veterans Affairs

01A04576

November 24, 2000

.

Robert L. Foster,

Complainant,

v.

Hershel W. Gober,

Acting Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A04576

Agency Nos. 98-1493

98-3806

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a

determination by the agency dated May 9, 2000, finding that it was in

compliance with the terms of the March 27, 2000 settlement agreement into

which the parties entered.<1> 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, that:

(1) The Complainant agrees to retire effective the first day he completes

25 years of federal service. The parties understand the Complainant's

service computation date to be such that he should complete 25 years

as of November 7, 2000. This agreement will serve as the Complainant's

letter of retirement and may not be withdrawn.

(2) The Complainant will be carried in a pay status from the date of

this agreement and be switched to leave without pay as of the day that

he will not be on leave without pay for more than six months in the

calendar year prior to his retirement. The

intent of this provision is to insure that the leave without pay will

not interfere with the Complainant being credited with 25 years of

government service.

(3) The agency will calculate the amount of gross pay that the Complainant

will earn while on a pay (non-duty) status. This amount will then be

subtracted from a lump sum award (non wage) of $50,000 payable to the

Complainant as soon as possible following this settlement agreement.

The agency agrees that it will process the payment of this immediately and

that payment should occur within 10 days of the date of this agreement.

(4) The Complainant agrees that he will not seek future employment with

the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The agency will agree to pay the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000)

to the law office of [attorney identified by name] within 45 days of

this settlement as payment for all attorneys fees in this case.

This agreement is in full and final settlement of this complainant [sic]

and all pending complaints, appeals or suits by the Complainant in this

or any other forum. This agreement does not constitute an admission by

either party of any fact or issue in this or any other case. The parties

agree that this complaint may be withdrawn as settled.

The Parties enter into this agreement freely and with advice of counsel

and with full understanding of the conditions and terms contained in

this agreement.

This document constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and

there are no other terms than those specified within.

By letter to the agency dated May 5, 2000, complainant alleged that

the agency breached the settlement agreement, and requested that the

agency specifically implement the terms. Specifically, complainant,

through his representative, alleged that the agency failed to carry

complainant in pay status though April 27, 2000, so his newly increased

elected life insurance would be in effect for his retirement on November

7, 2000. Complainant contends that this term was verbally agreed to

by the parties before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) on the day the

agreement was entered. According to complainant, �this issue was a

pivotal point� in his decision to enter the settlement agreement.

On May 9, 2000, agency counsel issued a letter to complainant finding

that it was in compliance with the agreement.<2> Specifically, the

agency determined that the settlement agreement did not contain any

discussion of a � life insurance question other than the effective date

of the insurance and how to keep [complainant] in a pay status through

that date.� The agency further determined that the alleged term raised

by complainant conflicts with OPM regulations and therefore would not

have been included in the agreement.

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).

Complainant argues that a verbal agreement was reached before an AJ,

wherein complainant would be able to carry his increased life insurance

when he retired in November 2000. This term, however, is not reflected

in the text of the settlement agreement. We note that EEOC Regulation

29 C.F.R. � 1614.603 provides that "Any settlement reached shall be

in writing and signed by both parties and shall identify the claims

resolved." The Commission has upheld an oral settlement agreement where

an agreement was formed during a hearing before an EEOC Administrative

Judge and transcribed by a court reporter. See Acree v. Department of

the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05900784 (October 4, 1990). In Acree, the

Commission noted that the hearing transcript evidenced the agreement

between the parties and that the subsequent written version of the

agreement reflected the terms of the oral agreement that was evidenced

in the hearing transcript. We find that the present circumstances are not

sufficiently analogous, as the record does not reflect that the purported

settlement provision addressed by complainant was transcribed during

a hearing. Moreover, the settlement agreement clearly provides that

the document �constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and

there are no other terms than those specified within� (emphasis added).

Therefore, we find that the agency correctly concluded that the settlement

agreement entered on March 27, 2000, had not been breached.

Accordingly, the agency's decision finding that it was in compliance

with the agreement was proper and is hereby AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0900)

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

November 24, 2000

__________________

Date

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify

that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

__________________

Date

______________________________

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 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.

2On appeal, the agency states that while the Deputy Assistant Secretary of

Resolution Management is responsible for determinations regarding alleged

breaches, the agency counsel erroneously believed that the facility

Director held this duty and responded directly to the breach claim in her

May 9, 2000 letter. The agency acknowledges that although the Deputy

Assistant Secretary should have issued the decision, the agency's May 9,

2000 determination of no settlement breach was nevertheless proper.