Early non-compliance agreement. The settlement agreement provided that a former supervisor had been removed from the complainant`s work area within sixty days of the date of the agreement. On December 30, 2006, in a letter accidentally sent to the EEOC antenna but transmitted to the Agency, the complainant alleged that the settlement agreement had been breached. The complainant argued that the agreement was concluded in February 2006 and was cancelled in October 2005. The Commission objected and found that the settlement agreement had been concluded on 16 October 2005 and that the complainant was or should have been aware of an alleged non-compliance before the end of 2005. In the appeal, the complainants argued that they had no real or constructive communication about the forty-five day limitation period to initiate contact with the EEO advisor. The Agency stated that EEO signs were found in many locations in the workplace; However, it did not contain any evidence in the recordings that EEO posters were on display. The Commission found that an allegation in the appeal proceedings was not sufficient to demonstrate to the Agency the burden of proof that the complainants had actually or constructively communicated the time limits. Rowena Beckmyer, et al v. Department of the Navy, EEOC No. 0120073167, et al. (September 26, 2007).
Available in accessible formats for people with disabilities. The Digest is now available online via the EEOC homepage under www.eeoc.gov.