Stephany K.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 14, 2016
0120152551 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 14, 2016)

0120152551

01-14-2016

Stephany K.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.


U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

Stephany K.,1

Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(Southeast Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120152551

Agency No. 4G330032314

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final decision (FAD) by the Agency dated July 7, 2015, 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

Believing that the Agency subjected her to unlawful discrimination, Complainant contacted an Agency EEO Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process. On November 19, 2014, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:

(1) Counselee will be made whole for all lost wages and benefits from January 15, 2014 to September 10, 2014. The pay adjustment will be processed within 30 days of today's date.

By letter to the Agency dated April 13, 2015, Complainant alleged that the Agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that the Agency specifically implement its terms. Complainant alleged that the Agency failed to process the paperwork needed to restore her lost wages.

In its July 7, 2015 FAD, the Agency concluded that because of confusion on how the pay adjustment should be processed, it was not done in a timely manner. The Agency explained that there were errors on the forms, that some officials were on leave which caused delays, and there was a lack of knowledge on the part of management as to how to handle the pay adjustment. Nonetheless, the Agency provided evidence that the back pay was fully processed. The instant appeal followed. In her appeal, Complainant asserts that there was a breach because the paper work was not processed in a timely manner.

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).

In the instant case, it is clear that the Agency admits that it did not process the pay adjustments in a timely manner. Nonetheless, the record reflects that everything has now been processed. In her appeal of August 9, 2015, Complainant asserts she is complaining about the length of time it took, not that she has not been paid. 2 While unfortunate, we find that the Agency has now substantially complied with the agreement. However, it is cautioned that such lengthy delays need to be avoided.

The Agency's decision finding no breach is AFFIRMED.

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 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 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

January 14, 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 If we were to find a breach of the agreement, the only options are specific performance (which has been done), or reinstatement of the underlying complaint. Before the underlying complaint would be reinstated, Complainant would have to return to the status quo ante, meaning she would first have to return all monies and benefits she received. Given that Complainant is protesting the amount of time it took the Agency to process her pay adjustments, we do not find that she is seeking reinstatement of the underlying complaint.

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

2

0120152551

2

0120152551