01A03228
09-08-2000
Stephen J. Jaramillo, Complainant, v. Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.
Stephen J. Jaramillo v. Department of the Navy
01A03228
September 8, 2000
.
Stephen J. Jaramillo,
Complainant,
v.
Richard J. Danzig,
Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A03228
Agency No. MC 99-62204-028
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final
decision (FAD) by the agency dated March 14, 2000, finding that it was in
compliance with the terms of the June 3, 1999 settlement agreement into
which the parties entered.<1> See EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.402;
29 C.F.R. � 1614.504(b); and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.
The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
(1) The terms of this Agreement are confidential between the Parties
and shall not be disclosed by either Party to any third party except as
may be required to fulfill the obligations assumed hereunder by either
Party, or to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions thereof
by the other Party. Complainant hereby recognizes that the disclosure
of this Agreement to any Federal agency or entity or official thereof
by the Agency shall not constitute a breach of this confidentiality
provision so long as the Federal agency or entity or official to which
or to whom this Agreement is disclosed has an official need to know of
the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
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 its terms. Specifically, complainant
alleged that in violation of the confidentiality provision of the June
3, 1999 agreement, the agency disclosed the existence and terms of the
agreement to an agency official, a supervisor, to which complainant was
to be assigned to work overtime. In its March 14, 2000 FAD, the agency
concluded that the official was advised of the agreement and its terms
so as to fulfill the agency's obligations pursuant to 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).
The agreement provides that when working overtime, complainant should
be assigned to work primarily outside due to his medical condition.
The agreement also stipulated that, to the extent complainant would
be assigned to work in other work centers, he should be assigned to
outside work. In that regard, when complainant was assigned to a work
center different than his own, the supervisor to which complainant
would report was advised of those terms of the agreement relevant to
complainant's overtime requirements. Upon review of the record, herein,
it is the decision of the Commission that the supervisor's knowledge
of the agreement and its terms as they related to complainant's working
overtime, did not a breach the confidentiality provision of the June 3,
1999 agreement. We find that the supervisor's knowledge of the agreement
was necessary to properly carry out the terms of the agreement.
For the reasons set forth herein, the Commission hereby AFFIRMS the
decision of the agency finding that it did not breach the June 3, 1999
settlement agreement.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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).
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)
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
September 8, 2000
_______________
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.