Council Meeting

Held Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Host: Vice-Chair Era Marshall

INTRODUCTION

Ms. Delia L. Johnson, Co-Chair of the Council and Director, Office of Civil Rights for International Broadcasting Bureau, opened the meeting with a few remarks and then asked the attendees to give their names, agencies, and positions. She thanked Era Marshall, Director of the Office of Equal Employment and Minority Affairs at the Smithsonian Institution, for sponsoring this meeting.

Mr. Jorge Ponce, Council Co-Chair, indicated that several federal agencies have added “gender identity” to their EEO Policy Statements. In addition, he stated that he had checked with the Census Bureau about the availability of the 2010 EEO file, and that it was not available yet.

EEOC UPDATE

Carlton M. Hadden, Director of the Office of Federal Operations at EEOC, was invited to address the Council on the topic of “Duplication in Reporting Requirements (Diversity Program vs. Affirmative Employment Programs).”

He began by providing an update of developments at EEOC. He introduced Lori Grant who joined him for the presentation to the Council and announced her selection as the new Director of the Agency Oversight Division (formerly the Affirmative Employment Division) in OFO’s Federal Sector Program.

Carlton indicated that the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the Federal Sector Complaint Processing Regulations was pending at the Commission. He noted that the NPRM would accomplish a number of things including allowing agencies to propose pilots as an alternative to the existing 1614 complaint process and would also enhance overall federal sector EEO enforcement, including EEOC Management Directive 715.

Carlton and Lori discussed a new project called the “FIRES” Project. They noted that this was a pilot project with EEOC, OMB, and the U.S. Department of Education to upload the statistical tables for the FY 2010 MD-715 Report to the OMB's MAX database. The MAX database is currently used to generate the President's Budget, and it has security safeguards to protect the data.

Carlton noted that this was the initial step in the direction of establishing a “Wikipedia” for federal sector EEO. Lori stated that federal agencies willing to participate in this pilot have until November 4, 2010, to notify Lori Grant at lori.grant@eeoc.gov. To get additional information on MAX, go to https://max.omb.gov.

Lori said that the MAX database will allow EEOC to expedite the issuance of future MD-715 reports. In addition, agencies will be able to share best practices. Co-Chair Jorge Ponce pointed out that he had heard that these agency communications through MAX were not FOIA-able.

Lori stated that an additional goal of the FIRES Project was to create agency-specific webpages with differing levels of accessibility.

Carlton noted there was no fee for joining MAX, as it was available to all federal government employees. He also said that EEOC had recently approved funding for enhancements for the project, allowing for enhanced data analyses by agencies participating in the project.

In addition, Lori indicated that EEOC was not asking agencies that had their own data online systems to get rid of them. MAX provides just an alternative for the manipulation of data tables. The 2012 requirement is just for the transmission of these data tables. Lori indicated that EEOC plans to make the submission of MD-715 tables mandatory through the MAX database in FY 2012 - together with the 462 Reports.

EEO DIALOGUE

Carlton provided a broad historical outline of the history leading to the establishment of OPM and EEOC’s assumption of federal sector responsibilities as well as the relationship between the two agencies over the years. He noted there were agreements and disagreements on issues in the past. For example, he cited how, after the MD-715 was approved in 2003, the two agencies disagreed on the collection of applicant-flow data. However, Carlton noted that all that had changed with new leadership in place in the two agencies. Jorge noted that GAO had issued a report a few years ago on the need for an improved relationship and collaboration between EEOC and OPM.

Carlton stated that for the past couple of years, both EEOC and OPM have collaborated closely on a number of projects. He mentioned the issuance of a joint memo by the OPM Director and the Acting EEOC Chair requiring federal agencies to collect applicant-flow data. He also mentioned the work in support of the recently issued Executive Order calling for increased hiring of people with disabilities.

Carlton also noted that there was new leadership in place at EEOC with the arrival of EEOC Chair Berrien and noted that the cooperation was continuing, noting the issuance of another joint memo from OPM Director Berry and Chair Berrien providing GAO with an update of actions being taken in response to its report. He also stated that there were ongoing and regular discussions between the two agencies.

A Council member from VA stated that his agency was conducting an adverse impact analysis on the selection process, starting with the applicant-flow data through the selection process.  The goal is to have the first phase of the project, development of applicant flow software program, operational after the holiday season.

A Council member asked about the status of OPM Standard Form 256 (Self-Identification of Reportable Handicap). Carlton responded that OPM was working on revising the form and had included OMB and EEOC in the discussions. [Go back to the March 4, 2010 minutes for a further discussion of this issue].

A Council member from the Treasury Department asked about the reporting requirements from OPM and EEOC (FEORP, MD 715, Hispanic Employment, Veterans reports); expressing a concern that they were duplicative. Carlton and Lori noted that with the OMB Max Project, EEOC and OPM could engage in a discussion of how it might be able to leverage the project so as to minimize reporting burdens on agencies, allowing them to engage in more robust EEO barrier analyses.

A Council member from the National Gallery of Art asked whether EEOC had looked at the validation of the hiring tools that will be introduced with the hiring reforms that go into effect on November 1, 2010. She pointed out the subjectivity of these examining tools, and their potential to have an adverse impact on some EEO groups. Carlton noted that was an area that EEOC needed to consider further. However, he stated that with increased subjectivity, the job of EEO investigators will become even more critical and challenging, in assessing the impact of subjectivity on employment decisions.

A Council member reminded the Council Executive Board members to follow up with OPM on the classification of EEO jobs.

Co-Chair Jorge Ponce talked about the need to have a mentor or champion for those wanting to rise to the SES ranks. Without one, Ponce said that getting an SES was more difficult than reaching the top of Mount Everest. The challenge is that current underrepresented EEO groups do not have many members serving at the SES ranks - so the pool of mentors from these EEO groups is limited.

A Council member asked about the feasibility of having joint EEOC/OPM oversight reviews of agencies' Human Resources and EEO programs. Carlton said that this had been suggested for quite some time and that it was a good idea but the challenge was getting to the point of actually making it happen.

There were many questions regarding the differences between diversity and affirmative action. As in the past, this polemic was too complex to bring cloture at this meeting. Someone made a suggestion to bring a panel of experts to address this issue at a future Council meeting.