U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Anthony H.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Western Area), Agency. Appeal No. 0120180434 Agency No. 4F926012717 DECISION Complainant filed a timely appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) from a final decision (FAD) by the Agency dated October 18, 2017, 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 as a City Carrier at the Agency's facility in Alhambra, California. Believing that the Agency subjected him to unlawful discrimination, Complainant contacted an Agency EEO Counselor to initiate the EEO complaint process. On May 17, 2017, Complainant and the Agency entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the matter. The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that: (1) Postmaster [named] agrees to separate [Complainant] from [MT] and not allow [MT] to supervise [Complainant] in any capacity. (2) [Postmaster] agrees to give [MT] a direct order not to come into contact with [Complainant] in any capacity. (3) In the event [Postmaster] is assigned to another office, [Postmaster] agrees to notify new management of his direct order to [MT]. (4) [Postmaster] agrees to make himself available to [Complainant] in the event any type of communication of this matter is necessary. (5) [Postmaster] agrees to reinstate 6 days of sick leave to [Complainant]. This reinstatement represents a period from April 22, 2017, through May 1, 2017. [Postmaster] will complete the process within 30 days of this EEO. On August 18, 2017, an addendum was made to the settlement agreement. It provided: (1) [Postmaster] will instruct [MT] not to come to the Alhambra Post Office without permission. [Postmaster] will instruct [MT] if she needs to come to the Alhambra Post Office for some reason, she needs to call the office and speak to him or another Manager or email him or another Manager for permission or she can call him on his cell phone. (2) [Postmaster] will inform [MT] that this procedure will be in effect for a period of 12 months from the date of the last signature on this settlement addendum. Complainant sought pre-complaint counseling asserting the agreement was breached when MT came to his facility. He alleged she came into the facility in July 2017, as well as August 10, 2017, and on September 1, 2017. Complainant alleged that the Agency was in breach of the settlement agreement, and requested that the Agency specifically implement its terms. In its October 18, 2017 FAD, the Agency concluded that the agreement was not breached. The Agency stated that MT was told not to come into contact with Complainant. MT was told not to come to the facility after the August 18, 2017 addendum. When MT came to the facility on September 1, 2017, she was immediately instructed to leave. When she did not leave, the police were called to remove her. The instant appeal followed. 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). We find the agreement is valid and binding. In the instant case, we find that the Agency did not breach the agreement. The May 17, 2017 agreement only required that MT not supervise or come into contact with Complainant. The record contains a sworn statement that she was informed of this. It is the August 18, 2017 addendum that instructed MT not to come to the facility without permission. When she did show up on September 1, 2017, and would not leave, we find the Agency immediately tried to remove MT from the facility and called the police when she would not leave. The Agency acted immediately to deal with the problem in compliance with the terms of the agreement. The Agency's determination that it was not in breach of the agreement is AFFIRMED. STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0617) 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. A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration in which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. 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. Complainant's request 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 agency's request must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC's Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). 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 March 22, 2018 __________________ 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 0120180434