0120161147
04-15-2016
Spencer T.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Great Lakes Area), Agency.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Spencer T.,1
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Great Lakes Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120161147
Agency No. 1J-494-0003-16
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's final decision dated December 30, 2015, dismissing his complaint of unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq.
BACKGROUND
During the period at issue, Complainant worked as a Mail Handler at the Agency's Patterson Annex in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
On December 15, 2015, Complainant filed the instant formal complaint. Therein, Complainant alleged that the Agency subjected him to discrimination on the basis of disability when:
on October 22, 2015, he asked the new acting supervisor if he was aware of his hearing disability and he said he was not.
Complainant further alleged that Agency management failed to notify the new acting supervisor verbally or in writing concerning Complainant's hearing impairment and accommodation per the terms of the November 30, 2005 settlement agreement that Complainant and the Agency entered into concerning accommodation for his hearing impairment. Moreover, in the formal complaint discrimination form, Complainant asserted that an Agency official indicated that he was "not given any instruction verbally or in writing regarding my hearing disability. This is a breach of contract made with the USPS in a 2006 case."
In its December 30, 2015 final decision, the Agency dismissed the instant formal complaint for failure to state a claim, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1).
The instant appeal followed. In response, the Agency acknowledges that while it dismissed the instant complaint for failure to state a claim, it is more properly analyzed as a breach claim of the November 30, 2005 settlement agreement. The Agency further states that Complainant's breach claim was forwarded to the Manager of Compliance and Appeals for processing.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
The Agency's final decision dismissed the instant formal complaint for failure to state a claim. On appeal, however, the Agency indicates that analysis of this matter as a breach claim is more appropriate. We agree.
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).
This regulation further provides that if a complainant believes that an agency has filed to comply with the terms of a settlement agreement, a complainant shall notify the EEO Director, in writing, of the alleged non compliance within 30 days of when the complainant knew or should have known of the alleged non-compliance.
In the instant case, we note that Complainant maintains that Agency management failed to notify the acting supervisor of his hearing impairment, which was purportedly in violation of the November 30, 2005 settlement agreement. As noted above, we find that the Agency's response to Complainant's appeal (that this claim is more properly analyzed as a breach claim) is appropriate. Specifically, we find that Complainant's claim should be raised as a claim of breach of settlement agreement, rather than processed as a separate complaint.
The Agency's final decision is REVERSED and the matter is REMANDED to the Agency for a supplemental investigation in accordance with the ORDER herein.
ORDER
To the extent that it has not already yet done so, the Agency is ORDERED to take the following action regarding the breach claim, within sixty (60) days from the date this decision becomes final:
1. The Agency shall supplement the record with evidence addressing whether the Agency was in compliance with the November 30, 2005 settlement agreement.
2. The Agency shall issue a new final decision regarding whether it is in compliance with the November 30, 2005 settlement agreement.
A copy of the Agency's supplemental investigation and new final decision shall be provided to the Compliance Officer as referenced herein.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)
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 77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 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) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0610)
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), at 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 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 (R0610)
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 (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 Complainants 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
April 15, 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
0120161147
2
0120161147
6
0120161147