Hung Lam, )
Complainant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01986921
) Agency No. 4F-945-0037-98
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
_______________________________ )
DECISION
Complainant filed the instant appeal on September 4, 1998 claiming that
the agency breached a settlement agreement.<1>
Complainant and complainant’s attorney signed a settlement agreement
on July 1, 1998 during the course of the underlying complaint being
processed by an EEOC Administrative Judge. The written agreement was
not signed by the agency until August 21, 1998. Complainant argues that
the agreement was valid on July 1, 1998. The agreement provides that
the agency agrees that:
[2]a. The Notice of Removal will be reduced to a Letter of Warning
effective September 11, 1997, the same date as the Notice of Removal.
The Letter of Warning will be effective and remain in the
complainant’s record until October 11, 1999.
The complainant’s attorney will be paid a flat fee of $1000.00.
Complainant supplied a copy of a letter dated July 17, 1998 from
complainant informing the agency that it breached the agreement by failing
to reinstate him as of July 1, 1998 “with full back pay and benefits from
that date.” On appeal, complainant indicates that he was reinstated on
August 29, 1998. By letter dated August 23, 1998 complainant requested
back pay from July 1, 1998 to the day he returns to work on August 29,
1998. By letter dated August 31, 1998, a Labor Relations Specialist for
the agency informed complainant that there was no agreement on a specific
date to bring him back to work and that therefore the agency was not
obligated to pay complainant any monies for the period from July 1, 1998
to August 29, 1998. On appeal, the agency argues that the instant appeal
is premature because complainant has not contacted the agency to allege
a breach of settlement and that no final determination has been issued.
The regulation set forth at 64 Fed. Reg 37,644, 37,660 (1999) (to be
codified as and hereinafter cited as 29 C.F.R. §1614.504(a)) provides
that any settlement agreement knowingly and voluntarily agreed to by the
parties shall be binding on both parties. If the complainant believes
that the agency has failed to comply with the terms of a settlement
agreement, then the complainant shall notify the EEO Director of the
alleged noncompliance “within 30 days of when the complainant knew or
should have known of the alleged noncompliance.” 29 C.F.R. §1614.504(a).
The complainant may request that the terms of the settlement agreement
be specifically implemented or request that the complaint be reinstated
for further processing from the point processing ceased. Id.
Settlement agreements are contracts between the complainant and the agency
and it is the intent of the parties as expressed in the contract, and not
some unexpressed intention, that controls the contract’s construction.
Eggleston v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05900795
(Aug. 23, 1990); In re Chicago & E.I. Ry. Co., 94 F.2d 296 (7th
Cir. 1938). In reviewing settlement agreements to determine if there is
a breach, the Commission is often required to ascertain the intent of the
parties and will generally rely on the plain meaning rule. Wong v. United
States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05931097 (Apr. 29, 1994) (citing
Hyon v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05910787 (Dec. 2,
1991)). This rule states that if the writing appears to be plain and
unambiguous on its face, then its meaning must be determined from the
four corners of the instrument without any resort to extrinsic evidence
of any nature. Id. (citing Montgomery Elevator v. Building Engineering
Service, 730 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1984)).
The Commission need not decide whether the settlement agreement was
entered into on July 1, 1998 or August 21, 1998 or on some other date.
Examining the matter most favorably to complainant we shall assume that
the agreement was entered into on July 1, 1998, and that complainant’s
appeal is not premature. The settlement agreement did not provide that
complainant would be reinstated on any particular date. The agency’s
reinstatement of complainant within two months of when complainant claims
the agreement was entered into is reasonable and does not constitute a
breach of the agreement. See Northen v. United States Postal Serv., EEOC
Request No. 05950774 (July 24, 1997). Because there was no breach of the
agreement, complainant is not entitled to any of the requested damages.
The Commission finds that complainant did not show that the agency
breached the settlement agreement.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS – ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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
64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 29 C.F.R. §1614.405). 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999)
(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 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).
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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:
Dec. 7, 1999
DATE
Carlton
M.
Hadden,
Acting
Director
Office of Federal Operations
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that
the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant’s representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
_____________________ _________________________ Date
Equal Employment Assistant1On 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999),
where applicable, in deciding the present appeal. The regulations,
as amended, may also be found at the Commission’s website at WWW.EEOC.GOV.
