Co-Chair Delia Johnson made welcoming remarks.

Thanks went to Alex Chan, FAPAC President, for sponsoring the meeting at the Omni-Shoreham Hotel.

Panel members, who were attorneys representing federal sector employees and attorneys representing federal agencies, were introduced. The topic was “Improving the Federal Sector Complaints Process” Best Practices, Success Stories, etc.

Marsha Browne – Assistant General Counsel - Personal Law Division - HUD

Avis Sanders – Spokesperson for the Plaintiff’s Attorney

Stephen Spitz – Fed Govt Employment Lawyer – Kalijarvi, Chuzi & Newman

Joseph Kaplan – Lawyer – Passman & Kaplan

Mark Hingston – Senior Attorney – Treasury Department – Office of General Counsel

Robert Gates - Attorney Advisor – National Labor Relations Board

William Ohlhausen – Deputy General Counsel – Broadcasting Board of Governors

Marsha Browne – Ms. Browne stated the need to establish better communication between Offices of General Counsel and EEO offices, in order to work together throughout the discrimination complaint process.

Avis Sanders – Ms. Sanders is the spokesperson for the group “Plaintiff’s Attorney.” They provide information to EEOC on numerous issues, i.e., case management that have common grounds, summary judgment, appropriate oversight of agencies, delays at OFO and settlement. Ms. Sanders briefed the group on the Triparte Group. This is an effort to have attorneys get together, as well as other individuals, who share a common interest in civil rights.

Stephen Spitz – Mr. Spitz emphasized the importance of better communication. We all need to share information/ideas. There is a need to develop a system to process complaints in a timelier manner. Mr. Spitz suggested that there might be three different levels. One would be the fast track, where both parties agree and the case is not complicated; two would be the regular cases; and the third would be the complex and complicated cases.

Joseph Kaplan – Mr. Kaplan had some ideas on how to improve the federal sector process from the plaintiff’s perspective. In regards to training – agencies must do better. The investigation process –we must assure a neutral and thorough process. Agencies must ensure the completeness of reports of investigation. We must ensure compliance of people participating in the process. There must be consequences when there are findings of discrimination; little is currently being done. Sensitivity training is not enough; he was thinking of out-the-door training. There have to be more referrals from EEOC-OFO to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for disciplinary action when warranted. [A Council member indicated that an OSC representative had stated, at the last NAACP Summit, that EEOC had not referred any cases to OSC for disciplinary action against managers found guilty of discrimination. Another Council member explained that the burdens of proof at EEOC and OSC were different]. We must have higher level of officials participating in the ADR process. Have decision makers at the table. All issues must be on the table. All issues should go through ADR. If agencies do not survive summary judgment, agencies should have to pay for the AJ hearing. [A Council member suggested that if Complainants do not survive summary judgment, they should pay for the investigation up to that point]. We need to have better qualified AJ’s at EEOC—not those who are hired by EEOC just out of law schools. Headquarter EEO officials should not have final say in settlement agreements. Agency heads should have more respect for EEO officials.

Mark Hingston – Mr. Hingston felt there was a need to review Final Agency Decision, settlements, etc. It is crucial to have a good working relationship with counsel and EEO. The No Fear Act (Public Law 107-174) was passed. Agencies will now have to pay for judgments made against them on discrimination matters at the district court level. Part 2 of the Act addressed the number of people who have been disciplined. Significant changes are to happen. The Act becomes effective 1 October 2003. EEOC issued the final rule to implement the amendment of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, under the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992. The full text is on the EEOC website at http://www.eeoc.gov. ADR is terrific and useful in certain cases. There are currently 3 – 4 opportunities for ADR. Mr. Hingston cautioned that this may be too many. Also that offering ADR too often may pressure agency managers to do something they have already decided not to do. Mr. Hingston explained to Council members that agency counsel resolve cases which are in the best interest of the agency, and that they do not represent management officials.

Robert Gates – Mr. Gates felt that relationships were fractured and that we have forgotten the mission of the agency. There is a perceived unfairness by the employee regarding the administrative process. There is a perception of retaliation, i.e., the manager will stop talking to the employee. We need to protect the process. We need to restore relationships and have a fair and open process. Mr. Gates went on to say there is one agency that will no longer have face-to-face interviews. They will use interrogatories. Also, complainant statements are turned over to management officials prior to the interrogatories. He felt this would have an adverse effect on the process.

William Ohlhausen – Mr. Ohlhausen stated that the No Fear Act has been passed. Mr. Ohlhausen stated that the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) is a small agency but has lots of complaints. The BBG has cultural differences and miscommunication because of its diverse workforce. BBG has had success with ADR and wants to be more proactive.

Co-Chair Jorge Ponce briefed the audience on the recently released Council’s report on the EEO Directors’ chain of authority. The report was passed to representatives from FAPAC, BIG and NAACP, who will take it for further action. The 1614 regulations and Management Directive 110 state that EEO Directors should report to agency heads, but this was not happening in the majority of large agencies. The National Association of Hispanic Federal Executives (NAHFE) circulated copies of the report to its members.