0120160903
05-03-2016
Vickie P.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Vickie P.,1
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Pacific Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120160903
Agency No. 1F901003815
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a Letter of Determination (Letter) by the Agency dated November 30, 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
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked in a position and at a facility unspecified in the record. Believing that the Agency subjected her to unlawful discrimination, Complainant contacted an Agency EEO Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process. On September 1, 2015, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that:
(2-a) Within 10 days from the date Complainant executes this Agreement, Complainant shall submit a letter of interest, to the attention of [individual named], Manager of Human Resources (MHR), Los Angeles District, requesting a developmental opportunity through a temporary detail assignment in the Los Angeles District Human Resources Department and enclose a copy of her eCareer Profile ("Letter of Interest"). Complainant's failure to submit her Letter of Interest as specified above within 10 days from her execution of this Agreement shall immediately and irrevocably terminate the Postal Service's obligations as specified in section 2(b) below.
(2-b) As soon as reasonably possible, the manager or supervisor of the temporary detail assignment opportunity will favorably consider Complainant's Letter of Interest and may, at his/her sole discretion, review Complainant's work history, education, qualifications, knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), attendance record, training record, safety record, and/or any other information the manager considers relevant to the temporary detail assignment opportunity.
(2-c) Management's favorable consideration of Complainant's Letter of Interest, as specified in section 2(b) above, is on a one-time basis only, and shall in no way obligate management to favorably consider at any time in the future Complainant's request or demand for or expression of interest in a temporary detail assignment in the Los Angeles District Human Resources Department or any other Postal Service facility, department, installation, or office. Management's favorable consideration of Complainant's Letter of Interest, as specified in section 2(b) above, shall in no way guarantee (a) Complainant the right to interview for a temporary detail assignment opportunity or (b) Complainant's receipt of a temporary detail assignment.
(2-d) In the event Complainant is provided a temporary detail assignment, Complainant understands and hereby agrees that her placement into the temporary detail assignment would (a) be subject to her supervisor's and/or manager's approval; (b) be of no specific duration and subject to cancellation at any time for any reason in management's sole discretion; (c) be governed by the applicable pay policies as specified in Employee and Labor Relations Manual section 417; (d) be subject to the applicable provisions in Chapter 716 of the Handbook EL-312; and (e) in no way guarantee Complainant's permanent placement into the temporary detail assignment. Complainant specifically agrees that legitimate, nondiscriminatory justifications for management to discontinue a temporary detail assignment include, but are not limited to, management's interest in providing another employee a developmental opportunity: where staffing of the duties performed in the temporary detail assignment can be arranged through some other means: where Complainant's services are required in another assignment or in her position of record; where in management's exclusive judgment Complainant is not adequately performing the duties of the temporary detail assignment; and/or where any of the duties performed in the temporary detail assignment are no longer needed.
(2-e) Complainant agrees that obtaining a temporary detail assignment, as specified herein, requires a competitive selection process and only the best-qualified candidate for each temporary detail assignment opportunity, according to management's exclusive judgment, will be selected.
By letter to the Agency dated October 21, 2015, Complainant alleged that the Agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that the Agency specifically implement its terms. Specifically, Complainant alleged that MHR told her that he would not grant a detail assignment anywhere because, as he allegedly told Complainant, "you don't get along with supervisors" and further asserted that her personnel file showed discipline since her date of hire.
In its November 30, 2015 Letter, the Agency concluded it had not breached the Agreement. Specifically, the Agency found that the Agreement did not guarantee that Complainant would be given a detail but only that management would consider Complainant's application. The Agency found that HMR did consider Complainant but decided against offering her the detail. The Agency further found that it had met all of the requirements of the Agreement, including a making a payment of $200.00 to Complainant, and that there was no breach of the Agreement.
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 Complainant has not shown any breach of the Agreement. We note that the Agreement does not guarantee that Complainant would be selected for the detail, only that her application would be considered. The Agency, on appeal, has submitted an affidavit by MHR attesting to the fact that he considered her for the detail and decided not to select her because he determined she would "not be a good fit" for the position. On appeal, Complainant has said that MHR showed "disdain and contempt" for her, and she denies she had attendance problems, but she has not established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that any breach of the Agreement occurred.
CONCLUSION
The Agency's determination of no breach is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0416)
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. The requests may be submitted via regular mail to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. 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
May 3, 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
0120160903
5
0120160903