-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/fa9358ec3d521a45ce4efc9ce8016667.pdf
4e30682507fcbed092524336e7d61d2d
PDF Text
Text
FAX COUERSHEEI "
Thu
Dec 01 1994 '6:17pn
To:
Attll:
White House
Steue Warnath
\
'
.Fax,': ,94567928
)' 'Fron:
'\
Fax:' 4 p~ges and a couer page •
.1
\
" .
\ ,
,
i
I
I,
"
'i'
�:,
\
"
,
'
"FOR innED lATE RELEASE
Thursday. 'Dec.' 1. 1994
,
' .. l
COtiTACT:
'
Reginald Welch ':
nichael WidOlliski
, (202), 663.;..49'!j0
,
TDD :,' (202,) 663-4494
\"
' , '
,
"
'
, EEOC CHA,IJUWlA"ItOU"CESTASK FORCES TO ADDRESS "
,
OPERATIO"AL ISSUES; RELEASES FV 1994E"ro~"T RES~Lts
WAStHtiGTOtl-"':' At' the f frst,III~~t f~g of the
. ,/
I.
U. S.
,
Equa I
i
,
'\
,
EmploYlllent Opportunity Cm11lIlission(EEOC)sinceApril 12~' 1994,
,.
1, ' .
.;
,
,
,
~
.•
. '
. '\
1
new Cha irlllan' Gil'bert F.' ,Case llas almouriced ~he' forlllation of three
task forces ,to' address cr i tica 1 issuef t aci T!g.
the EEOC .,
.
.
'
'.
\.
At Chairlll~n Casellas' reql;lest. Uice Ch'afrlllan Paul n. 'Igasaki '
will chair ~he ta~kForce on Cha.~ge Processing. COIlllllissh;mer
Joyce E. Tucker wil 1:. cha ir the Task Force on Fa ir Elllp 10Ylllent
,
Practices: Agencies '(FEPAs). andCollllllissioners Paul. Steuen ';i ller '
and H. GaiH I ,S iIberlllanw i H ,co":cha ir ,the Task Force on~
IAlternatiu,e,Dispute~esolution (ADR).
I,
"
',Since arriuing at EEOC on O~tober 3. Cas~llas has been
examining th~ agency's operations'and considering uarious options
for flllprouelll(m~. "I want these task forces to ,play' a :signif icant
,role, in t~e deue~oplllent andilllplelllentationofa strategic 'plan,to
reduce the agency's pending charge inu~ntory and tOlllake it ' "
'
, . operate lIIore effecti'uely, ",'said Chairlllan. Casellas. ' '.
.,
.
:
' , .
.
'
' .
,,'
,:
I '
'"
The Charge Processing T(,lsk Force will study ways to illlproue
. the current systt;:lII.with the twin goals of reducing the 'existing
nUiliber of pendirig charges and deueI'opi,ng lIIoreeffectiue and '
effiCient procedures forresoluing charges.
"
,
,)'
'1
,
'.
•
,In urging that a "clean sheet~' approach be' taken. Casella's',
'said the-reuiews ,sho~ld,be done "with,aneye,toward illlprouing
efficiency, eI"illlinating redundant or unnecessary steps. and '
reducing" tillie, whileensul'ing due process 'for the indiuidual
,charg i ng partie~ and respondents ,"
, )
,
"
,
,
.
~
, ' , ..:
,
'\ '
The fair Elllployn.entPracticesAgencies Task Force wi II '
eualuate EEOC's partnership with these state and local agencies
to ensure UliaxiIIIUIII, effectiueness: ,EEOC has'wo~ksharfng agreelllents ::
with FEPAs around the, country to proc~ss charges., .In Cis'cal ye,ar
I
, '
- 1II0re - '
: i
'.-
.
�EEOC Iask,rorce -page 2'
(FY) 1994, FEPAs rec~iued 11 perce~t of alotal of 155.612
charg~s 'c i led under EEllC-i:mfor~ed statutes,
.
'.
..
,
. . \
The tnternatiue Dispute Resolution 'Task Force, is asked'to
recolllllle'nd appropriate options' Cor the use' of, ADR ,by the
';
'Collllllission. The task force will base its recollllllendations on an
eualuation oC the EEOC pilot 'ADR progralll and its reuiew of the
. ilIany existing studies of ADR. ',' "
"
,', ' ' ' ,
,
Chairlllan Casellas has asked that the Charge Processing and
the ADRTask Forces prepare recollllllendations' to the' CO~lIIisSion
within 9&Vdays, a:nd the FEPATask 'Force to .'presentits'
'
reco!"lIIendationswithin60 ~ays.
'
,
.',
'
(
,
'
"
, Today·s meeti~g ~oim:ides w1t:b the relejise of inforillat ion on
EEoC~s enforcelllent ac;:tiuity during FY 1991. which ended only,days
pr i or to Case lIas', arri Uji 1 at the agency.' The report Crolll last ' '
year "reinforces the need for bold initiatiues to illlproue·:the way
we serue those who cOllie ,to 'us' Cor help." Casellas said.'
,
FY 1991 marked the third year i,n ,a row that the ageilcy
rece~u~da record breaking nUlllber of charges anegingjob bias;
incr~asirigthe nUiliber oC charges awaiting ,inuestigi,ltion to ,nearly,
,97.,000 at the end of FY 199,1., '"
"
,
...
.
.
.
Chairlllan Casellas reported/that EEOC receiued"91.189 new,
charges. of discrilllination between Oct ..1, 1993 and Sept. '30,,1991
',-7'" 3.7 percent.ouer the record nUlllber pf 87 .9.12 charger~ceipts
in FY 1993 (see Table 1)*. The EEOC's pending inu,entory of, '
96 .. 915 charges represents a:32.6percent increaseouer the
pending. 73,121 charges at the .end of FY1993 (see Table 2),;'
t I
'
"
'
, , '
'
The 1II0St significant in~reases frolll FY 199j in
discrilllination charges' b~f basis inClude disabi lity related
charges. up 23.5 percent. and retaliation ,based charges. up'14.2
percent; There were also increases in sex and religion b~sed.
charges, as we 11 ~s a sllia I) i ncreasein charg~s .fi h!d um~er 'the,
Equa I Pay Act" Race, age, and nat iona I or ig in based charges
declined slightlyfrolll.last. year's' t?tals (see Table ,3), ,
Discharge ,cont i nues to be, t,he lIIost often alleged elllp IOYlllent
,discrilliination issue, cOlllprising 17 percent of all 'charges' in FY
1991, down slightly by 1.9 .perc.ent. frolll FY 199.3. Other issues
) . that decreased ,,in .frequency in, FY,1991 lI,Iere hiring and layoff,
'. down '8.2 perc~nt and 2.3 percent~ respectiuely. Issues .showirtg .
, an incr~ase ouer FY 1993' figures are sexual harasslllent (..,13'.2
percent). harasslllent ofanon':'sexual nature (+l2~5 percent), a~d
terllls and conditions of elllploYlllent (+10.1 petcent) (see Table 1). '
/
..
,
':
,
,
,',
.
�EEOC Task Foree - page 3
,I
'
, Inuestigators resolued 71,563'charges in FY 199~, the second
htghest,milllberof resolutions in EEOC~s history and only 153
, fewer than last year's record total,
'
\
.
.
.
Monetary benef.tts to' uictillls of disc~illlinathjn ob'tained
through adlllinistrati,ue enforcellient efforts reach~4 an all tillie'
,high of $146.3 lII~nion. cOlllparedto $~26.B lIIillitm inFY 1993;
Prelilllinarydatafrolllthe Office of'General Counselsho~ the
COllllllission filed 12B lawsuits and,resolued 456 in FY'1994,
Monetary benefits of $29.2 lIIillion lill:re'recouered through
litigation, prilllari,1y in the forlll of back pay, down frolll the ,FY
1993 total 'of $34~:1l11illion.
."',, ,',"
"
"
"
, , , E~OCenrorces Title un '!Jr" the Ciull, Rights Act of 1964,' , '
which prohibits elllplOYlllenf discri~lnation based on race, 'color,
religion,' sex, or 'fIatil)nal origi'fl; the Age Discrilllinatio'n in
ElllploYIII~n,t Act; the ,Equal Pay Act; the Alllericans with,
' " ,
Disa~ilities Act~ wJiich prohibits discrilllination against people
'!11th disabH ities' in the priuate si:ctor and state and, local
gouernlllents ;proh I b i !ions' ,aga i,nst d iscr IlIIi nat ion affecting
.indiuiduals, with di'sabilities in the federal gouernlllent; and
sections of the Cluil Rights Act of .19..910
l-
Iable 1. Ca.parison of ,Receipts-
,[y 99
,62,135
Rece~pts
\
FY21
63~B9B,
92
FY
FY 93- ,FY 94
72,'392
B7,942
'91,IB9
,13.2:f.
21.,6:f.
,3.7:f.'
'
Cha~ge Frolll
Prior, Year
4.6:f.
2.B:f.
"
;
,
\
lable
Z.Pend~nu
,
Inuentoru
,
,FY,1999
FY 1991
'FY 1992
FV 1993
FY 1991
41,9B7
45,717
52,B56
73,.124
96,945
'. '.1,OB1
3,730
7,139
29,26B
, ,23,821
B.9
15.6
,3B.3
32.6
9'.0
10.1 '
. 12.2
IB.B
,
Pending
Change/ "
Prior'Year
Percent Change,
Months Pending
-B.9
7.9 '
J
'i.'
- 1II0re ,:", '
I
,
,.
'
'
�..
.
"
"
EEOC JaskForce - page 4
)
Table 3, Basis
-'
,
lBasis
,
\.
31,&5&
25.8&0 '
19.571
18.859
',-o.i,
8,.1.,
',...l:&
" 23~5
7.154'
1.449,
' f,334
12.&27'
7.414
1.54&
1.395
14.,415
' -0.5
&.7
4.& '
.14.2
fable 4. IssUes
:',
,
"
(
• l,
Issue'
F,,'1993
i
43.5&5'
13.&18
10.364
7.273,
·7.715
7.900
&.301
5.507 '
Discharge, '
Terns/Conditions,
Harass'neilt
Sexual'Harassnent
Pronotion
Hiri,ng
Wages
Layoff .
"
'
31.&95
23.919
19.8,84
15.274',
Race
, Sex
Age
Disabllity
l'IationaI '
Origin
ReI igion,..
'Equal Pay"
Retalia,tion
I
'Per~ei1t'Change
FV 1993 ' FV 1994
,
FY 1994
Percent· Change
42.75&
15.029
lL&57: '
8.234
8.060
7.252
...
&.~82
5.382
I'
-1.9
10.,4 '
12.5·
,13.2
4.5
' -8'.2,
2'.,9
-2.3
,
.)
i \
'\'
I
,
,
\...,
.
'
(
The statistics to rollo~' represent charges ril~'~ith and' proCessed by EJlJC only. Thtydo ~t
" 'include charges reieiued and processed by FEfAS. "
.
' '
,
,~,
,
H
"',
'
"
I"
-
_,
,
"
J
;
,Data uere coM9i1ed on 111151.l1,by the Office ofProgran Operationsrro~ EJlJC Charge Data
,SYS'eJI'S IlationalData Base. EE!trs'coR9Uterized Charge Data SysteR is conti~lly u~ated
as data are sullllitted toEJlJC headquarters by EEOC field officesaronnd,the,country;'
. therefore, statistics lllay change slightly ouer tine.
'.'
~,fY
,
1m uas the first full yedr EEOC enforced ritle! ,of the ~llA;
,,
, i
(
,
�,
I:.'
SENT BY: '
, . ' :.:' _ 9-22-94,.;
, " ;;)t:::i,:"el-~'" ~.'!V·'H),''tI.!,'
~~J'''m!i:;l \.CCR
: '. ; . ."'" "SeP:21
•
•
•
,
•
',II
:'.
,
I'
'
.•
'
I
.:'
t
r
:.1629'fc,,:ST,hND;C:
j '
,,'
EEOC-t "
4:56PM; ;:
,I,
"j
•
•
.
~0006' .
•
,
'0
, ",i
" , -.
•
-"
,
\
'
I
".
"
"
,
,
'
,
"
.
.."
.' .:
,
,
~
',.'
\,
-.l
','
'/,-
"l
".1
:
'
."
:'
\
,
,
•
.'
.
-,'
.'
rt •
"1",,
.,',
~
,',
I.
,'.'.
"
'.
,,
,}.
'
'" .
"
~.
:
:,: . ':
"
.'
'
, !,
'"
,', ,
"
.
.
~
" ,
,:\'
,
, ,
'e:.';
.'
"
'
," MEMcmANDuM·
,
,
,
I.,
'
:
\
',.,
;
.'
,
,','
,
,
..
."
'"
'
.~,
,
,
l, '
'
...,
,.'
"
~
.',< .
" "
i"
,
'"/:.
,J'
• .I
','
--~--------~--.--~-.~.~~~~'~~-~'----~'-'--~-.~'----'
,.:.
;"
,
;' /',
"'.,.':'
'.
"
,
",
\
~
('
..
"
:
,'1.
"
"',1
",
"
~
,
,
. "
. '.
'.
,"
,,
"
"
".
\
'
'"
"
, .
,
'L', \ " "
',"
•
','
l'
'"
.
(
"
:
,'S. . J JuiMIc,
I
',',.
./
"
'-.
"
..',
"",'
.w.,a. ~.W.ker'1J Ael,
.
{'
,
"
':,
.',
,', "I
"
'
.....
;
"'.'
.
'.,'
)
II
.'.:
'
\
'~.
, ; ' .'. . ", ~tutweek~~ ~bI ~b,or.nd H~.~~cu C.Omm!~ reported. :::: •
, :::" '" out 'the, JU!IItiCll·for 'Witd.iC:~ WtMkeru•. Jl.ct "Y 4'YO~ of:1Q.7.At lo.,.,iuti:, ,':'
"
'., "
'I'
I'
.r
r:
'
.:;."
them to 'brIng YoI' the ",ard. COVI blU fOr. Senate vote before Con.,..
" adtcu.m.. '
.
(
, ,",'
, ' , ' , , .. " ' ,
',"
", "
!
•
. t'
'JJ,
<I' .
'.
.(.,
"
..
. :",
.
'.
,r
<.
t
"
f
J
•
'\
,
'j'
,
:
•
..
I
.:
,- .
.
,
I,
'''PtoY~I'Ncm~~tiCft'Ad :.
, . 6:,
-,
... .- .
' ",
\;.
,please c:on~ct sWtor. MltchlU, .ice~YI MUrray,: ~cl. Sl~ aha .... :
""
F,
':
t,
'
..
, ". j
,
I.
.:',
"
.
.;~
' .I
,"
~.
,'"
'
','
'."
'.
','
,. \ "
""',
.'
• '.
.l:
l,
"
'
" I...
';"
'(
�.;)CJ''U Ill:
11-28-94 ; 11 : 12AM
NUV·-,::,;;,-.1. ;::-;7"
EEOC...
CCIIT ECM:# 3
mutBD Sl'ATES OEPA.aTIItI:ftT OF '£DCJCAno..
1,)1'1 U;~ u.r '. tilt AIIIoI:i~TAl(l ~"M.fI, lltiU ~(lIt elV IL KLvl(TS
~"riday,
To:
.Sched\otlers ir.
Oev;~ 1
':}',/,fit
November 25 t 94
fed.lowing Offic::p.s
"a'trick
O,.il Casellas
O&nn.:..~ H~yaDhi
David Montoya
Rcb~rr.a. ~ch.t.e:nburg
Tony Co.l:i. f.:1
Winston
Shirley Wilshire
Judy
From:
Re:
Nhora Serrano (No:rma Can:u's
lnteragen~y
Seh.duler~
civil Rights Chiefs Tel@conference c.ll at
4: 30 pm on .Honday, Novemee:- 26 94
Fo!low-Up Fax with Sridge N~mb.r and
I
The
tele~,ho::e
number
wh.i~h
you call
~cceaQ
ir!t~
Cod.
to connect is
1-700·991-1T3~,
The conf'li\:r.-a:nce aC.cess
19999.
Tl~~
~nde
.expect.ed clu.ration cf
which
~he
yo~
chen p'lJ.nch in is
c«11 ie to be one. hour. I
will call each of you on MondAY to cQnfi~m your participation and
tha.t you ha.ve racelved these two faxes.
Thanks a9~ b~
Please feel free to
ca~.~.
t,,;).!.,
jO"J.1: pllLt..iencc
durin.3 t.h~
:'a.lft "all.
mE., 260 - 9228, if t.here are any questions .
.
...
__,----_ __ _
..
..
..
.........
�"'" SEN1' BY:OCLA
.
. ; .4-20-95 ; 12: 16PM;.
, ·EEOC....
CCITT ECM:# 2
.. VICL~~·~~
.1
I.
INTRODUCTION
The EEOC is· at a critical juncture. Thirty years. after the
implementation of the civil. Rights Act which created us, the
nation's promise of equality. and civil rights remains as. elusive as
ever.
Race and· gender relations are strained as never before.
Discrimination on the basis of age and disability continue despite
initial enforcement efforts.
Amid the important debate on
affirmative . action,. we see many that are assuming that job
Cliscriminat'ion 1s largely a thing of the past. Would that .that
were so, but, here at the EEOC, it is obvious that it is not. The
work of the EEOC, ,that of eradicating employment discrimination, is
still America's unfinished businessQ
The EEOC's case processinq workload continues to grow and
increase .at all levels.
Current projections conservatively
estimate that we will have well in excess of 100,000 charges to
process by the end of Fiscal Year 1995 if we continue to operate
under existing rules. One of our District Directors summed it up
,by noting, "For every three quarters ofa charge that we complete"
we take ~n an additional charge. We are always playing catoh-up,
without the prospect of additional resources. eo
The inescapble
truth is t~at EEOC budget and staffing levels have remained flat
over recent years, while at the same ~ime, charges in certain areas
. have shot up and the agency has assumed major additional statutory
responsibilities.
The prospect for those additional resources remains slim.
Congressional and administration downsizing and cutting remain high
priorities.
Despite our, great need, and the modest increase
proposed by President Clinton, we are not likely to see more
funding, in the near future.
This e'normous build-up of pendinqcases, coupled with a lack
of priority to .class or other significant casework, has resulted in
a serious loss of public confidence and faith in EEOC's ability to
effectively carry out its law enforcement responsibilities. ' The
stature of EEOC has particularly been· diminished in ~he last
several years, as the growth of the case inventory has accelerated
and public perceptions that t.he likelihood of a fair resolution·
]Day only be remotely achievable.
We found that this lack of
confidence 'and frustration exists on the .part of charging parties,
employers, civil rights groups, plaintiffs' and management
attorneys, and our own employees at all levels. There is broad
consensus that our charge process is· tlbrokenlt and needs SUbstantial
reform.
'
.
This need for change is critical to our. missi'on and to our
survival as an agency. The EEOC is a central part of this nation's
commitment to outlaw job discrimination and, while it is true that
to fully accomplish this mission wBultimately need an infusion of
resources, it is also true that we can and must do better with what
�EEOC""
.. SENT. .BY:OCLA
CCITT ECM:# 3
2
we already have~ Our Chairman has put it well in saying that we
must act to change ourselves or have 'some other force change us
and I. for one, believe that we have the best information and tools
to decide our appropriate and effective direction.
We have a rare opportunity as a new administration, an
opportunity to create the necessary change called for by our own
'employees, by employers, by the civil rights' community and by the
bar., Along with the amazing level of agreement among those with
significantly disparate interests, we.have the commitment of the
clinton Administration to "reinvent" itself through the National
Performance review. A.dd to that the pressure from Congress for
each governmental agency to justify its existence and we, have an
extrordinary force for change.
We are indebted as well to past administrations that have also
taken a bite out of the apple of EEOC reform. We have learned much
from their efforts and from their studies and experience. We have
learned that we must move quickly to make change and to be open to
fine tuning and changing course as we learn the effects of our
'Work. We have learned that we need to strike a balance between the,
effort to process cases quickly and the' need to aggressively
enforce the laws that we are charged with carrying out.
eommissiener Silberman has given me permission to use a very apt
analogy to EEOC management, likeninq the job to elephant training.
When you nudge the Elephant to one side, it goes barreling off in
that the direction, nudge it the other way, and it goes way off in
the other.. The balance is an elusive one. Most of all, given
limitedreseurces, we have learned ,the need to make difficult
choices and to be more strategic in o4r useo! limited resources.
II.
METHODOLOGY
On November 22,1994, about a month after I arrived here at
the. Commission, Chairman casellas asked me to lead a task force on
EEOC charge processing, < taking a, C;lean< sheet approach in
recommending changes which would improve our procedures and
operations. In addition to my staff, we assembled an exceptional
group of folks, including field investigators and supervisors,
headquarters personnel,field attorneys and representatives from
our union, from the National performance review effort, from the
office of L'egal Counsel and from the Chairman's office and the ADR
task force.
<
I want to take this opportunity to thank and salute these task
force members, whose input was thoughtful and deeply felt, whose
commitment to civil rights was exceptional and whose hard work and
team spirit will continue well past this report, they truly will be
a part of the EEOC's ongoing force for change:
[RlW) LIST]
�4-20-95 : 12: 17PM ..
. ' SENT BY:QCLA
EEOC-l
CCITT ECM;# 4
3
A.
INTERNAL INPUT
I sent out a memorandum to every EEOC staff person in every
one of our offices seeking their input.
And we' met with many
offices which I will list in a moment. Both in written comments
and in discussions, our staff feels strongly that our case process
takes too long and unnecessarily involves substantial amounts of
staff, especially with regard to enforcement actions taken in
anticipation of or in response to internal oversight activities.
Many investigators and management staff recommended that
mandates that inflexibly require' that older cases always be
investigated before newer charges or. that volume be ~he primary
measure of all performance be changed. Many in our organization
believe'that the perceived full investigation policy has caused us
to overinvestigatecharqes Which have little or no merit, and that
there must be a way to more quickly process weak charges so that we
can focus on the more serious violations. There is a desire for
greater prosecutorial discretion, so that we can have an impact
despite our limited resources and for greater flexibility in field
approaches so that individual strengths and weaknesses can be taken
into account. Our staff wants to be held accountable for their
work,. but is troubled by. wha:t':. has bee~·L .. perceived .... B:S
micromanagement. They ·desire greater sharing of information on a
lateral 1evel, between offices, as to what has been tried and what
has worked in terms of charqe processing.. In addition to direction
and leadership~ headquarters must empower our people on the front
lines ,in our distr let, area and local offices, to 'Work together to
make our system work.
I have found our employees to be a very committed and hard
Working group of people.
Most of them are overworked and
overstretched and care "deeply about fighting discrimination,
despite the enormous pressures of our caseload. Acknowledging the
problems in our operations by no means is an indictment of our
staff, many of whom have been here from. our very beginnings as an
agency.
I am proud to have joined their team and we at the
Commission owe them strong leadership in these difficult times.
B.
EXTERNAL INPUT
We reached out, both here in Washington, and with each field
office that we visited, to meet with groups and companies and
lawyers that reel that they have a stake in our work. Attorneys
for management and charging parties, as well as employers and
employer groups, such as the Equal Employment Advisory council and
Organization Resources Counselors indicate that their clients are
experiencinq inordinate delays at EEOC, oftentimes as lonq as
eighteen months before contact following the initial position
statement. They are also frust.rated by lack of informat.ion and by
a seemingly mechanistic need to fully respond to, even obviously
meritless charges..
Civil riqhts groups such as the Leadership
�, "'SENT BY:OCLA
EEOC'"
4-20-95 :12:17PM
CCITT ECM:# 5
4
conference for Civil Rights, National Womens Law Center, NAACP,
American Association of Retired People, the National Asian American
Legal Consortium, the National Council of LaRaza and a number of
disability rights 'organizations cited or documented problems with
charge processing including investigators discouraqi~g the filing
of bona fide employment discrimination charges.
They also
expressed concern for training for our staff in increasingly
complex legal and related areas. involved in our Qnforcement
activities.··
They I as dld the employer groups, offered a
partnership to improve our effectiveness. .To overcome these great
challenges, such partnerships are essential.
There is broad consensus that we cannot treat every case in
the same way, and that we must rid ourselves of procedures which
have become obstacles to our work, 'so that we can produce a more
timely and quality product
There is also areement that EEOC
should adopt a case prioritization system which will permit it to
expeditiously I but fairly , resolve "weaker·" cases I and focus on the
most serious· instances of employment discrimina,tion.
0
, [REVIEW XETHODOLOGY]
.,
�SENT BY:OCLA;4-20-95 :12:18PM ;
CCITT ECM;# 6
EEOC....
/;:26
. VleI, C,1tIt12S M()1IDNS . . ..
. ..11»- CfmrvntIS ffItr1I A-pp~l11I'Ll.
.
MOTIONS
' .
Vice Chair:
[INTRODUCTION ON MANDATE, WORK AND FINDINGS]
Accordingly, I make the following motions:
L
Q)That, the commission adopt priority charqe handlinq procedures
under which field offices will categorize and prioritize charges.
The first category includes those high priority charges identified
as falling within the national or local enforcement plans and those
in wbich it appears more likely than not that discrimination has
occurredrthe second cateqory includes those charges that initially
appear to have some merit but will require additional evidence to
determine whether it is more, likely than not that a violation
~ccurred;
and the third category includes those charges appropriate
for immediate resolution.
That the Chairman develop,
in consultatior! with the General
Counsel, a National Enforcement Plan for approval by the Commission
that will
identify priority
administrative
and
issues
and
set out
litigation enforcement.
a
Issues
plan
for
currently
designated by the Commission for priority review will be superseded
by the Enforcement Plan.
�. EEOC....
4-20-95 :12:18PM
SENT BY:QCLA
CCITT ECM: # 7
2
.(§)
That the following Commission policies are rescinded:
The a'full investigation a, . policy and the Commission resolution
/"
dated December 6,
The
Commission's
Remedies
and
1~
upon which it is based.
February
Relief
for
5I
1985
"Policy· Statement
Individual
Cases' of
on
Unlawful
Discrimination."
The Commission's September 1'1, 1984 I'Statement of Enforcement
Policyo II
That the Commission eliminates the SUbstantive "no cause" letter of
determination. in cases where the appropriate investigation of the
charge has
not
established reasonable cause to
discrimination has occurred.
believe that
Such charges should be dismissed
without particularizedf1ndings.
However,
field
offices are
encouraged to share with charging parties the basis for EEOC's
determination through such means as pre-determination interviews •
.
)
�celTT ECM:# 8
EEOC....
4-20-95 :12:18PM ;
SENT BY:OCLA
3
(j)'th'at settlement efforts be encouraqed at
administrative
process
and
that
the
all
stages
Commission
may
of the
accept
set.tlements providing "substantial" relief when the evidence of
record
indicate~
a violation or,"appropriate" relief at an earlier
stage-in the investigation.
That, until the Commission adopts its National Enforcement Plan,
the authority of the commission to decide to file suit is hereby
.
delegated to r .
the General Counsel in Title VII and ADEA enforcement
,
.
actions involving individual claims of disparate treatment not
rising to-a pattern of discrimination
(~,
those cases which are
-currently."certified").· The General Counsel may re-delegate that
authority
to
the
Regional
Attorneys~
after
the
National
Enforcement Policy -is adopted, the Commission will determine those
·classes
of
cases
over which
it
retains
litigation
decision
authority, and the remainder will .be delegated to the General
Counsel
"
f
Attorneys..
who lIay re-deleqate that authority to' the Regional
The authority-of the commission is delegated to the
General Counsel to make referrals to the Department of Justice_as
to Title VII and ADA cases against state and local governments; the
General Counsel may re-deleqate that authority to the Reqional
Attorneys.
�4-20-95 : 12: 18rM :
SENT BY:OCLA
CCllt ECM;# 9
EEOC-t
. .:. . ;.-'-'-'........~-.
"r-=-'--'--'-----------~--------.~---------.;.,;.--'---.....o.....:.~--'-'-'""'--~
~;
~;
:%
!~
Spec'al Meeting of the EEOC to Consider
. Recommendations of the
Charge Processing Task Force
~
!;:'
\>:
;0:
~;
.:'
~
:f:
#:
Task 'Force Recommendations' to be
Implemented by ,
CfJairman Gilbert F. Casellas
i
"
.':
,
~
;}
;1
,
,
,.
'"
:;
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
'
I
"
if
;~
,~.
+
"
.
~l
:'i
Based on the Gommission's votes. I am prepared to begin implementation
immediately, reque~g the help and cooperation of all of our employees. l
~;
therefore request and' direct as follows:
~:
~;
1.
I am re4uesting the Gtmeral Counsel arid the Director of the Office
;: of Program Operations ("OPO"), with. broad consultation with internal staff and.
;~
I
~
,
" external stakeholders. to prepare a draft national enforcement plan for
if
~ preSentation to the. Cha.irnWI by June 30, 1995.
~:.
. !
I am requesting district directors and regional attorneys to prepare
~; local enforcementpla.t:J.s to be submitted to the General Counsel and Director of
~. OPO by August It W95. Such plans shallindude categories of cases to be
~f prioritized and plans ~or resolving older charges.
. 2.
'
~i
~)~
3.
Field offiCes shall immediately begin. implementation of priority
charge processing proeedQreS. The Office of Program Operations shall prepare
and submit to the Chajnnail by May IS. 1995, flexible guidance for use by field
;i.'
(i
ii
~;
,.
~.
:~
i!
;i~
~~
,.
,
offices.
,
4.
Under ~e new charge processing procedures, potential charging
parties will not be discouraged from r11ing a charge, after being advised of
EEOC's jurisdictional :requirements. Charging parties will be advised that some
charges may be dismissed. at intake, with a notice of right to sue.
<.
\(
5.
Chargmg parties and respondents shall nonnally be provided with
':. access upon request ~o the positions of dIe other during the investigation..
k
Charging parties and respondents shall be advised of this policy.
:n
I
:.:
i
.
•
.... ' - ' - _ - - ' -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.....;.._----1
�4-20-95 :12:19PM
,
SENT BY: OCLA
EEOC....
CCITT ECM:#10
6.
Directors shall begin use of non-substantive "no cause" deter:ininations by May 1S
1995. The language of such deterininations shall be prepared by the Director of OPO. in
consultation with Legal Counsel, and submitted to the Chainnan by May 1, 1995.,
t
I
I
7,
I am requesting that the General Counsel authorize regional attorneys to cease the
process of submitting presentation memoranda in ~ases involving recoInmendarions against
litigation. If a district director disagrees with a recommendation against litigation by the regional,
attorney. the matter may be submitted to the General Counsel, who will make the final decision.
I also request that regional attorneys be authorized to cease submitting presentation memoranda
in cases, referred to the Department of Justice. I will work with the General Counsel to advise
regional' attorneys by May I, 1995 of reponing requirements respecting these cases.
Presentation memoranda to the Commission \Vill no longer be required in Title VII
actions involving, individual, claims of disparate treatment not rising to '
a pattem of discrimination. I will work. with the General Counsel to advise regional attorneys
by May I, 1995 of reporting requirements' re~g such cases.
8.
and ADEA
enforce~ent
9.
In cases in which District Offices will still be required to submit Presentation
Memoranda to the General Counsel (Le. unon-cenified cases"), I am requesting that the General
Counsel forward each such Presentation M.emorand~m to the Conunission within founcen days.
10.
I am requesting the General Counsel to develop further standards for delegation
of litigation authority to regional attorneys' as part of the national enforcement plan.
11.
I am requesting the General Counsel to delegate to regional attorneys the authority
to seek temporary relief pursuant to § 706(f)(2) of Title W, without prior approval from the
General Counselor the Commission, in cases involving individual claims of disparate treatment
not ~ising to a pattern of discrimination, when the District Director. has concluded on the hasis
of a preliminary investigation that prompt judicial action is necesstUy to cany out the purposes
of the Act.
' "
12.
I recognize that in order to enhance legal unit productivity I regional attorneys must
have input into basic administrative decisions such as legal unit staffing leve1s. computer and
software needs and litigation travel budget We will work: aggressively to address these issues
in order to facilitate more effective ad.m.i.nistrative processes.
13. In preparing new standards for evaluating fJ.cld offices and individual employees, the
labor-management partnership shall eStablish standards for evaluation of regional attorneys and
district directors which should include' measures for evaluating their collaboration and
cooperation.
14.
New systemic cases developed in the field offices based on individual or
Commissioner charges shall not require prior approval or'oversight of the investigation by OPO.
2
�SENt BY:OCLA
'.
EEOC.. .
4-20-95 ;12:20PM
CCITT ECM;#l1
'
15.
Directors are encouraged to increase the use of diiected investigations in ADEA
and EPA cases. Requests for directed Commissioner charges ~ Title VII and ADA cases may
be submitted directly to the Conunission, and if signed by a Commissioner, shall be investigated
like other charges, without OPO oversight of the investigation. The Director of OPO. in
consultation with Legal Counsel, shall submit to the Chairman by May' 15. 1995.
recommendations for implementation of a directed Commissioner charge procedure.
16.
I am requesting the General COWlsel and the Director of OPO to consider
establishing pilot enforcement units, ~hich will include attorneys and investigators.
,
17.
I am requesting the General Counsel and the Director of OPO, with input· from
Legal Counsel and field staff. to prepare and submit to dle Chainnan by August 15, 1995, plans
. fcir training of the Conunission's legal and enforcement staff, including training for effective
implementation of the national and local enforcement plans.
18.
OPO is encouraged to share infonnation pertairling to EEOC and FEPA charge
processing maintained in Headquarters with field offices as requested. The Director of OPO shall
submit to the Chainnan by May IS, 1995 proposals for implementing this policy.
19.
The Office of Communications and LegiSlative Affairs shall submit to the
Chairman a proposal for responding to inquiries concerning the new procedures announced today
and for responding YO complaints about prioritization of charges in particUlar cases.
3
�THE WHITE HOUSE
WASH t NGTON
EQUAL ~LOYKBNT OPPORTUNITY STATEMENT
EXECUTIVE OPPICE OP THE PRESIDENT
The President is committed to ensuring equal employment
opportunity for all Executive Office of the President (EOP)
employees. Equally as important, the President is committed to a
government that is free of discrimination and which reflects the
diversity of this nation.
This statement reaffirms the policy of the EOP prohibiting
unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. The EOPdoes not
condone nor tolerate discrimination based on race, color,
national origin, sex (including sexual harassment), religion, age
(over 40), disability or sexual orientation, in any of its
personnel policies, practices, and operations.
All EOP agency heads and employees have a responsibility to
uphold this policy. Each employee must be personally accountable
for his or her performance in ensuring and promoting equal
opportunity principles and in recognizing diversity as a source
of strength for the EOP. Moreover, managers and employees alike
must work together to ensure a workplace free of discrimination
and sexual harassment.
In general terms, unlawful discrimination involves improperly
making employment decisions or carrying out actions based on the
factors listed above. Discrimination on the basis of sex
includes sexual harassment. Sexual harassment,as defined by the
Equal Employment Opportunity commission and for the purposes of
the EOP, is: unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual
favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature
when: (1) submission is made explicitly or implicitly a term or
condition of an individual's employment; (2) submission to or
rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis
for employment decisions affecting such individual; or (3) such
conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering
with an individual's work performance or creating an
intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
While every EOP employee may raise claims of discrimination
and/or sexual' harassment, employees' rights, responsibilities,
appeals, and remedies may vary. If you believe that you have
been discriminated against or sexually harassed, you may pursue
an equal employment opportunity claim. You should be aware that
the timeframes for,raising claims vary for EOP employees from 45
to 180 calendar days from the alleged discriminatory event.
,
......,1 ....
�!
If you have any questions about the process and timeframes for
raising a claim or would like more information, please contact
Sharon Solomon, Equal Employment Opportunity Manager, Office of
Administration, Executive Office of the president, at (202) 395
3996/TDD: 395-1160.
�Accomplishments of the Civil Rights Division in the Clinton Administration
The Civil Rights Division is the primary agency in the federal government charged with
enforcing federal civil rights laws. These laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race,
color, sex, religion, national origin and disability, among others. These protections extend to
a wide range of activities, including voting, education, employment, housing, the use of public
accommodations, and access to reproductive health services.
Since the Clinton Administration took office, the Division has made substantial
accomplishmen~s in each of the areas of civil rights enforcement. Major accomplishments
include:
... Criminal Prosecution: The Division remains strongly committed to the vigorous prosecution
of criminal violations of the civil rights laws .
.. In Fiscal Year 1995, the Division filed a record 83 criminal cases, surpassing last
year's record of 76. The number of defendants charged (138) was second only to last
year's total of 139 defendants.
.. The Division filed 42 cases involving racial violence charging 66 defendants, the
highest number of cases and the second highest number of defendants ever charged in
one year .
.. The Criminal Section maintained an overall 89 % success rate.
'.. The Division has placed a special emphasis on hate crimes where serious injury or
"",'_"'':'', ..,
,""
"",cr,
death 'results. For ' ,p... -'" "', ""..
,
. , exam Ie:
.. In Richland, Mississippi, four members of a neo-Nazi skinhead organization,
pled guilty to conspiracy and interfering with the housing rights of an interracial
couple by throwing a molotov cocktail at their trailer home .
.. Three defendants, one of whom is a racist skinhead and a member of the white
supremacist group "South Bay Nazi Youth," were convicted of a civil rights
conspiracy after they drove through the streets of Lubbock, ,Texas, hunting
African-American men, luring them to the conspirators' car and shooting the men
at close range with a short-barrelled shotgun. One victim died, one was seriously
wounded in the face and another had a finger blown off.
.. In Livingston, Texas, six defendants pled gUilty to civil rights charges for
beating randomly selected African-American men with a rifle and a rodeo belt
buckle, and punching them 'repeatedly as they tried to escape. The defendants
had been angered at seeing other black men at a night club in the presence of
white women. The adult defendants were given prison sentences ranging from'
20 to 43 months.
PHOTOCOpY
PRESERVATION
.. .....
,":'
,
�Accomplishments Memo
Page 2
~
Five skinheads were sentenced to terms of imprisonment ranging from 16 to
49 months for conspiracy after beating an African-American man while he and
his wife, who is white, were in a public park in Iowa.
~ Two defendants were sentenced to 81 months in prison after being convicted
of conspiracy and housing interference in connection with a drive-by shooting into
the homes of two African-American women in Alma, Georgia.
~ In Livermore Falls, Maine, two defendants were sentenced to 70 and 88
months following their guilty pleas to civil rights charges after threatening four
Latino victims, chasing them by car away. from the store, and firing shots at the
victims' fleeing car, wounding one victim in the arm.
~
In San Diego, California, an inspector with the Immigration and Naturalization
Service at San Ysidro pled guilty to sexually assaulting a foreign national who
was appealing the confiscation of her border crossing card. After the assault, the·
defendant returned the victim's border crossing card to her and offered to obtain
border crossing cards for her children if she agreed to see him again.
~
In New Jersey, a police officer with the Kearny Police Department was
sentenced· to 87 months imprisonment after being convicted of unlawfully
assaulting and injuring six persons on separate occasions between 1990 and 1993.
~
An officer at the Hawaii Youth Correctional Center :who pled guilty to striking
and punching in the face a juvenile ward of the Center was sentenced to 11
months imprisonment.
~
In West Virginia, an officer with the Logan City Police Department was
sentenced to one year and one day imprisonment after pleading gUIlty to
assaulting a handcuffed arrestee on three separate occasions during the course of
the arrest.
... Police Misconduct Initiative: The Division has developed a comprehensive initiative to
address police misconduct.
~
The goal of the initiative is to .establish a comprehensive approach to combat
and prevent law enforcement misconduct, both through deterrence and through
effective training and prevention. The initiative's efforts have been directed at
evaluating current Department endeavors relating to state and local enforcement
agencies, and ensuring coordination between criminal and prospective civil
enforcement efforts, and between the Division and other components of the
Department.
�.,
1
_• •
Accomplishments Memo
Page 3
This included an assessment of the roles played by different Sections within the
Division and by other Department components, an evaluation of the manner in
which information on police misconduct currently is obtained and processed, and
the manner in which information may be shared among Division Sections and
Department components. The initiative also organized cross-training among its
Section and component members, and discussed .ways in which the funding
components may promote effective training of law enforcement officers.
A number of measures also have been taken to begin an effective and appropriate
civil enforcement program. We undertook for the first time a critical analysis of
various civil enforcement options, both ,in terms of modes of enforcement and
available remedies; we obtained and evaluated information regarding law
enforcement agencies whose practices might merit review; and we developed
criteria for selecting law enforcement agencies for investigation. A team of
attorneys has been assigned to the civil enforcement effort and the team is
conducting investigations of various law enforcement agencies.
Free Access to Clinic Entrances Act: The Division pressed successfully for enactment of
the statute and is pursuing a vigorous enforcement program .
II>
.. The Division has brought nine civil actions under FACE, sought and obtained
preliminary injunctions, and enforced preliminary and permanent injunctions against
individuals who have engaged in obstructive blockades of reproductive health facilities
or threatened violence to those who offer abortions .
.. Since the charging of our first criminal FACE case in August 1994, the conviction rate
has been 100 %.
Voting Rights: One of the Division's most important mISSIons is to ensure that all
Americans enjoy a full and effective right to vote, free from unlawful discrimination .
II>
.. The Division is fully and vigorously enforcing the National Voter Registration Act
NVRA) -- the so-called "Motor Voter" law. The Division's litigation has successfully
defended Congress's constitutional authority to enact the NVRA and has brought states
that originally resisted the law -- California, Illinois, Michigan, Mississippi,
Pennsylvania, .South Carolina, and Virginia -- into compliance. The Division is
monitoring other states for full compliance.
.. The Division has reviewed more than 12,500 submissions under Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act and objected approximately 150 times on the grounds that proposed
changes have violated the Act.
.
�,
'l
•
.'
Accomplishments Memo .
, Page 4·
.. The Division created a Shaw v. Reno Task Force which has been defending "racially
fair redistricting plans againse'unjustified claims that they are unconstitutional "racial
gerrymanders. "
.
.. The Division's vigorous enforcement of the language minority provisions of the Voting
Rights Act and Section 5 of the Act resulted in new and expanded protections of Native
Americans' right to be provided election information and assistance in their own
languages in counties in New Mexico and protections of Chinese Americans' right to be
provided Chinese language election materials and assistan~e in Alameda County,
California, and New York City." We have established a Minority Language Task Force
to enhance our enforcement of these important protections .
.. Pursuant to our authority under the VQting Rights Act, the Division has monitored
numerous elections around, the country in order to ensure that minority citizens are able
to cast their ballots, have those ballots counted and are able to·· receive assistance -
including effective assistance In Native American languages, Chinese, and Spanish '-_.
from the person of their choice while casting their ballots.
.
"
~ Americans With Disabilities Act: The Division has placed a high priority on fully enforcing
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a comprehensive civil rights law for people with
disabilities .
'
.. The Division created the Disability Rights Section, which handles the Division's
responsibilities for enforcing the laws protecting the rights of people with disabilities,
including the Americans with Disabilities Act's (ADA) provisions regarding
nondiscrimination. in public employment, access to government services, and access to .
public accommodations. The ADA affects 6 million businesses. and non-profit agencies,
80,000 units of state and local government, as well as 49 million people with disabilities.
,
/
.. The Division has sought to promote voluntary compliance with the ADA by providing
technical assistance regarding, the Act's requirements and engaging in extensive outreach
efforts. Major initiatives include -"
\
.. Operating a toll-fr~ ADA Information Line that receives well over 75,000 .
calls per year.
\
.. Placing an ADA Information File in 15,000 local public libraries throughout
the country .
.. Disseminating more than 27 million ADA publications and information pieces
to the public since January 1993.
�·
, ,
Accomplishments Memo
Page 5
<III Producing ADA public service announcements for radio and· television
featuring Attorney General Janet Reno.
Since the beginning of the Clinton Administration, through an aggressive enforcement
program, the Division has been successful on over 400 QCcasions -- through settlements,
judicial decrees, or other means -- in improving access for disabled Americans. For
example,
.
.
<III
<III The Division entered into aformal settlement agreement with the United Artists
Theatre chain in which the company agreed to make its facilities accessible to
moviegoers with disabilities. This agreement with one of. the largest theater
owners in the nation will not only affect the lives of Americans with disabilities,
it will also serve as a model for other theaters and entertainment venues.
<III The Division obtained consent decrees with Becker C.P.A. Review, which
prepares over 10,000 people annually to take the national CPA exam, and with
Harcourt Brace Legal and Professional Publications, which operates the nation's
largest bar examination preparation course (Bar/Bri), to make these courses
accessible to students with hearing and vision impairments.
<III The Division entered into formal settlement agreements with the Cities of Los
Angeles and Chicago in which the cities agreed to take major steps to make their
911 emergency telephone services more accessible to people who use
telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD's).
The court granted summary judgment in our favor in United States v. Morvant
(E.D. La. Mar. 23, 1995) holding that a dentist's policy of refusing to treat
individuals with HIV or AIDS violated the ADA. This case represented the. first
decision on the merits of an ADA suit brought by the United States under Title
III of the Act.
<III
Through nationwide settlement agreements, the Division achieved greater
physical accessibility for people with disabilities to major grocery (Safeway
Stores, Inc.) and restaurant (Lone Star Steakhouse and Saloons) chains.
<III
... Housing and PUblic Accommodations Discrimination: The Division has· made attacking
housing and lending discrimination a high priority.
<III In Fiscal Year 1995, the Pivi'sion filed 133 new cases under the amended Fair Housing
Act. While slightly below last year's record number of cases, this is still a significant
increase over numbers of cases filed in the years before 1994.
�Accomplishments Memo
Page 6
The Division was quite successful in its attempt to settle filed cases without resort to
litigation where possible, but was also very busy litigating cases. During Fiscal Year
1995, the section tried 17 cases, double the normal number of trials that Housing
attorneys have handled in past years.
<II
<II The Division obtained a record amount of monetary relief in 1995. Over $24 million
was obtained in the 123 cases resolved by settlement or court decision.
<II The Division recently settled a major case charging that American Family Insurance
Company, the largest provider of homeowners' insurance in Wisconsin, violated'the Fair
Housing Act, where the company had failed to offer homeowners' insurance in the
predominantly African American community in Milwaukee to the same extent and on the
same terms that it offered such insurance in the majority white areas of the city and its
surrounding suburbs. The consent decree provides for injunctive relief, $5 million in'
monetary damages to individual victims of discrimination, and over $9 million in low
interest loans for the formerly excluded communities.
<II The Division resolved a major lending discrimination suit against the Northern Trust
bank in Chicago, m., resulting in monetary relief of $700,000 for victims of the
discrimination.
Large award~ were also obtained in fair housing cases., For example, in a case
alleging familia) status discrimination against the operator of several mobile home parks
in California and Washington, a consent decree awarding $2.2 million was entered; in
a case alleging race discrimination at a large apartment complex in south Florida, a
consent decree awarding $1.2 million was approved by the court; and, in a case resulting
from the Program's fair housing testing program in the Detroit area, a settlement totaling
$425,000 was approved by the court.
<II
<II The Division resolved a major public accommodations suit against the Denny's
restaurant chain. In addition to, substantial monetary relief for individual victims of
discrimination, the settlement included significant provisions to prevent future
discrimination.
.. Employment Discrimination: The Civil Rights Division is responsible for enforcing Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against state and local governments.
<II During the Clinton Administration, the Division has filed nearly sixty new lawsuits
charging both individual discrimination and patterns~nd practices of employment
discrimination.
'
�Accomplishments Memo
Page 7
. . In that same time, the Division has also obtained orders providing injunctive and
make-whole relief for over 2,000 victims of discrimination. This is a new record .
.... The Division is also' currently administering the distribution of over $10 million in
damages to victims of employment discrimination .
.... The Division has been deeply involved in the President's review of affirmative action
and in the preparation of a proposal to reform affirmative action in government
procurement.
Citizenship and National Origin Discrimination:. In April 1994, the Office of Special
Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) merged with the Civil
Rights Division. OSC's mission is to eliminate workplace discrimination based on a worker's
citizenship status, national origin, or the employment eligibility verification process .
II>
.... In addition, the Division has investigated 1,691 discrimination charges and initiated'
125 independent investigations. During this period, the Division filed 44 complaints and
negotiated 158 formal settlements of charges and 26 settlements of independent
investigations.
.... The Division has stepped up its efforts to deter employment discrimination by
assessing civil penalties in .each meritorious case .
.... The Division obtained an important ruling in'U.S. v.Guardsmark, which held that all
work-authorized individuals are protected under the "document abuse" provisions of the
Immigration Act of 1990 (lA'90). In settling this case, the Division successfully
negotiated the largest civil penalty ever assessed under the antidiscriminatory workplace
provisions of the statute .
.... As 'part of its public outreach program, the Division obtained an automated employer
hotline (1-800-255-8155, TDD 1-800-362-2735) aimed at combating employer confusion
under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The hotline, along with its innovative
automatic "fax-back" feature, has been extremely successful and 'provided up-to-date
information to over 7564 callers between July, 1994 and December, 1995.
Educational Opportunities: The Division continues to be committed to eliminating the
vestiges of segregation in elementary and secondary education as well as in state institutions of
higher education.
.
II>
.... In the area of gender discrimination, the Division continued its challenge to the male
only admissions policy of Virginia Military Institute (VMI) and The Citadel, two public
�Accomplishments Memo
Page 8
universities that continue to deny women the unique educational opportunities and
benefits available at the schools .
.. In the past year, the Division intervened in two private. suits, Sinajini v. San Juan .
County Sch. Dist. and Meyers v. San Juan County Sch. Dist., to challenge allegations
that Native American students in Utah were being denied equal educational opportunities
because of their race and limited-English speaking proficiency .
.. The Division also entered into a consent decree providing for enhanced educational
opportunities for handicapped pre-trial detainees at the Cook County, Illinois Jail.
.. The Division continued its challenges to the formerly separate higher education
systems in Mississippi and Alabama. In Alabama, we obtained relief which included for
the' first time the establishment of endowments for the state's historically Black schools.
... Institutionalized Persons: The Division remains firmly committed to protecting the civil
rights of institutionalized persons .
.. The Division entered into a comprehensive consent decree with the Commonwealth
of Kentucky requiring substantial improvements in all aspects of the operation of its
juvenile detention centers statewide. This settlement will result in enhanced educational
services, medical and mental health care, and the investigation and proper resolution of
incidents of alleged abuse of juveniles.
.. The Division has obtained civil contempt orders against District of Columbia officials
for their failure to provide adequate care to patients of D.C. Village nursing home,
consistent with court orders, and to provide adequate community-based mental retardation
services developed to meet the needs of the former residents of Forest Haven .
.. Civil contempt orders have been obtained against Tennessee State officials for failing
to implement core requirements of outstanding orders designed to ensure the safety and
well-being of the residents of the Arlington Developmental Center. The final order
entered by consent of the parties requires 200 residents to be placed in appropriate
community-based facilities and programs .
.. Comprehensive investigations of 18 city and county jails in the State of Mississippi
have resulted in numerous comprehensive consent decrees and. the construction -- or
planned construction -- of 9 new jail facilities.
�.
~
I
,.
Accomplishments Memo
Page 9
.. Coordination and Cooperation with other Federal Agencies: The Division coordinates the
enforcement by. Federal agencies c;>f various statutes that prohibit illegal discriminations in
programs that receive Federal financial assistance.
As part of the Administration's efforts to reinvigorate the effective, consistent, and
timely enforcement of grant-related civil rights statutes, as required byExecutive Order
12250, the Division held individual meetings with over 26 Federal grant-giving agencies .
. The purposes of these meetings were to identify questions and problems, determine
training needs, and share worthwhile practices and procedures utilized by various
agencies. As an outgrowth of the meetings,' the Division has conducted training sessions
for 14 Federal agencies and the State of Tennessee, which has a State law equivalent of
Title VI. In addition, an agency advisory group was established to identify current issues
and build a consensus for proposed solutions. The group, which is made up of 12 Federal
agencies, will meet with the Division every month.
<If
The Division developed a strategy for publicizing its responsibilities as a result of
entering into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Office of Justice
Programs (OJP).· The MOU gave the Division responsibility for investigating complaints
of services discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion
filed against law enforcement agencies receiving assistance from the Justice Department.
Pursuant to this strategy, the Division developed and had approved for distribution a
complaint form and a brochure advising individuals of their rights under grant-related
civil rights laws. These materials will be distributed at a grass roots level by various
civil rights organizations. In addition, the Division developed a "Question and Answer"
brochure advising law enforcement agencies of their responsibilities under grant- related
civil rights laws. Distribution is expected to begin soon. Finally, the Division met with
numerous law enforcement interest groups advising them of its mission and seeking their
advice as to how best to publicize it.
<If
The Division took several steps to increase public awareness of its mISSIon and
activities. After an over 10 year hiatus, the Division revived the Civil Rights Forum.
This quarterly publication advises Federal agencies, interest groups, and interested
individuals about policy developments concerning enforcement of grant-related and other
civil rights laws, recent court decisions, and other items of interest. In addition, the
Division continued to staff an educational center at various conventions and meetings,
answering questions and providing educational material about its activities .
<If
.. Redress for Japanese-American Internees
In FY 1995, the Division issued $10,500,000 in redress for 525 cases to American
citizens and permanent aliens of Japanese ancestry who were forcibly evacuated,
relocated, and interned by the United States Government during World War II. As of
<If
�•
Accomplishments Memo
Page 10
the end of FY 1995 J the Division authorized redress payments totalling over $1'.5 billion·
in nearly 80 J OOO cases.
I
• Increased Fine and Debt Collection:
,
,
<ill The Civil Rights Division collected or had funds disbursed to aggrieved parties for
. judgments awarding restitution penalties and fines totalling $25,132,408 in fiscal year
199? This banner year represents a 50% increase over FY 1994 awards of $12.5
million, and a 407% increase over the previous five year average ..
J
\.
May 22, 1996
;.
\.
)
/"
.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Stephen Warnath - Civil Rights Series
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath
Civil Rights Series
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1997
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36406" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/641686" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen Warnath served as Senior Policy Analyst in the Domestic Policy Council. The Civil Rights Series includes material pertaining to the Civil Rights Working Group and topics such as affirmative action, English only, age discrimination, religious freedom, and voting rights. The records also include confirmation briefing materials for Department of Justice (DOJ) and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) nominees. The records include briefing papers, correspondence, schedules, testimony, reports, clippings, articles, legislative referral memoranda, and memos. The majority of the memos are internal between the Domestic Policy Council staff and the staff of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and between the Domestic Policy Council staff and Congress.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
134 folders in 13 boxes
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[Civil Rights Working Group]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domestic Policy Council
Steven Warnath
Civil Rights Series
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 4
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/Systematic/Warnath-DPC-Civil-Rights.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/641686" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2/8/2012
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
641686-civil-rights-working-group-b
641686