Page images

forced basic changes. It required development of a new capability for program operation within the regular procurement and contract administration structure of the contracting agencies. It required the development of a comprehensive reporting system to provide for the first time- factual information on industry employment patterns.

Responsibility for action had always rested with the contracting agencies, but there had been little coordinated activity. Now the Committee has direct liaison with the activities of the agencies. Each agency now has personnel assigned to review contractors' personnel practices and to provide technical assistance in developing new programs. As a result, many contractors have worked out, or are working out, specific plans of action for recruiting, training, upgrading and job assignment—all designed to improve performance under an agreed-upon timetable.

To check on results, the Committee has the mandatory compliance reporting requirement in operation for all manufacturing and service contractors with contracts of more than $50,000 and 50 or more employees. A similar reporting program for the construction industry has been launched and a comparable action program is being developed.

Significant developments of a pattern-setting nature already have taken place in a number of industries. Some are discussed in a later section (see Pattern Changes).

Contract Compliance

Executive Order 10925 requires that contracts with an agency of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government include an equal employment opportunity clause. The seven-point clause developed by the Committee (see Appendix) is as binding upon the contractor as are other clauses in the contract-the contractor who denies employees or applicants for employment equal opportunity because of race, creed, color or national origin violates his contract.

Nondiscrimination clauses have been included in Government contracts for years, but the current clause is stronger and provides for more effective enforcement than previous clauses.

It not only bars the contractor from discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color or national origin, but it also requires that the contractor take

are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without discrimination.

The ban on discrimination in the clause covers employment; upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship.

The clause states that the contractor will comply with the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Committee, will file such reports as the Committee requires, and will permit access to books and records to ascertain compliance. The contractor is required to display notices of his compliance with the Executive order and to notify any labor union with which he has contracts of his obligations as an equal opportunity employer.

Plain language in the clause spells out the fact that the contract may be canceled or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts in the event he is found to be in noncompliance and refuses to take corrective action. The ultimate sanctions of contract cancellation or debarment are not punishments for crimes but rather are tools with which to obtain compliance.

This is clearly provided in the procedures spelled out in the Committee rules and regulations. They require a notice to the contractor that he is not in compliance and is in imminent danger of losing his contract; notice of the reasons he faces. such action; and an opportunity for the affected contractor to comply with the Committee's requests under the Executive order. In several instances, companies have been told they face such action and in each instance they have brought their practices into compliance with the Executive order.

The contractor is required to include the same nondiscrimination provisions in subcontracts and purchase orders.

Rules and regulations of the Committee provide that contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders and other transactions not exceeding $10,000 (other than Government bills of lading) are exempt from the requirements of the Executive orders unless a special Committee order withdraws the exemption.

Surveys and Reviews

Primary responsibility for enforcement of the contract clause lies with the agency making the


(1) To make certain that the contractor complies with all the nondiscrimination provisions of the contract, including the taking of affirmative action to insure equal employment opportunity.

(2) To investigate and obtain adjustment of complaints of discrimination in connection with employment by the contractor.

The contracting agency's first responsibility is discharged primarily through survey and review processes, coupled with counseling advice and, if necessary, direct instructions as to steps to be taken.

There are several types of survey and review processes. In their normal order of usage, they


(1)-Regular compliance reports-These mandatory annual reports provide the base for the Committee's compliance programs. Information from the reports, readily available through automatic data processing, makes it possible for a contracting agency to systematically review all of its contractors on a regular basis.

(2) Special compliance reviews These reviews are frequently undertaken when there is some doubt as to the contractor's compliance, particularly when investigation of complaints indicates lack of compliance. But they may also be carried out in connection with the study of employment practices in a given industry or locality. Such special reviews require not only compilation of information from such sources as the Committee's compliance reports, but also on-the-spot inspection, discussions with management and employees, careful analysis of the contractor's policies and practice, and other steps designed to get a full picture of the situation.

(3) Preaward Survey-Insofar as possible, the contracting agency should determine prior to the award of a contract the ability of the successful bidder to comply with the nondiscrimination clause of the contract (in other words, to comply with the Executive orders).

These processes are intended to insure compliance with the Executive orders without dependence on the filing of complaints as a means of discovering lack of compliance. Of necessity, this has required that contracting agencies assign personnel with particular skills in this field to work with contractors in the development of pro

employment opportunity.

The principal contracting agencies are developing the internal capability for effective administration of the equal employment opportunity program and for systematic surveys and reviews of compliance by the contractors with whom they do business. Committee officers and staff members have worked with the agencies, through training programs and conferences, to help improve the effectiveness and efficiency of agency operations and of personnel assigned to the program.

The Complaint Process

Any employee of, or applicant for employment by, the Federal Government or any Government contractor has a right to file a complaint with the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity-if he feels he has been discriminated against in any personnel action.

Complaints may be filed directly with the Committee or through any branch or agency of the Federal Government.

The rules and regulations provide that the contracting agency is to furnish the Committee with a report on its investigation within 60 days after it receives the complaint. The 60-day goal has not always been achieved, but, as experience is gained, the time on complaints has been cut down steadily and it is expected that the great majority of complaints soon will be processed within the time limit.

Each agency investigation report is reviewed by the Committee staff. If the report is complete and no discrimination is found, the complaint is closed for "no cause."

If the report is complete and discrimination based on race, creed, color or national origin is found, the Committee reviews the corrective action taken to determine its sufficiency. If the report is not complete, or if the corrective action is inadequate, the case is returned to the contracting agency for further action. In some cases the agency and the Committee participate jointly in the investigation. (Although the Committee has the authority to act independently, this authority is seldom exercised since the primary responsibility for securing compliance rests with the contracting agencies.) If a subsequent review of the reports

indicates appropriate action has been taken, the complaint is closed as having been satisfactorily adjusted.

In the majority of cases, it has been found that the corrective action involves and affects employees other than the individual who filed the complaint. This is usually true because practices involving discrimination or denial of equal opportunity

are not limited to an individual employee or applicant, but are directed at all members of the affected minority group (see Pattern Changes).

Thus, the resolution of each complaint, by changing practices affecting all members of a minority group, or all minority groups, usually works to the benefit of substantial numbers of such employees or applicants.


Employment Pattern Changes Resulting From Complaints in Companies in Seven Industry Groups

When individual complaints of discrimination have been found to be valid and have been corrected through the processes called for in the Executive orders, the result often has been significant change in employment patterns.

An analysis of complaints in companies in seven major industries indicates the major cause of charges of discrimination has been promotion and transfer policies. Over three times as many complaints have been concerned with promotion as with the second most important cause, initial hire. Discharge was third, accounting for less than 10 percent of the complaints filed. Significant pattern changes or "breakthroughs" have occurred in all three areas.

The resolution of promotion complaints has usually involved major changes in company policies and revisions of collective bargaining agreements some of which have contained discriminatory clauses.

Investigation generally has disclosed the following broad pattern in existence prior to complaints to the Committee: Minority group employees were assigned at time of hire to racially homogeneous groups. These groups could be in departments, sections, lines of promotion, etc. But whatever classification was assigned was the one usually recognized under the collective bargaining agreement as a separate unit for purposes of seniority and bidding on jobs. The collective bargaining agreement recognized at least two and often several of these separate classification units. As a result of the company's policy of assigning jobs based on race, creed, color or national origin, separate seniority groups perpetuated the separation by effectively preventing free transfer between classification groups.

In the great majority of cases, minority group employees were assigned, regardless of qualifica

tions, to the lower-skilled, lower-paid jobs where their opportunity for advancement based on ability and seniority extended only to the top of their particular classification. In several instances, the highest jobs to which minority group employees could aspire, regardless of qualifications, paid less than the lowest base rate for other newly hired employees. These higher-paying classifications were barred to Negroes, or, in some areas, to Mexican-Americans.

Specific corrective action to eliminate discriminatory practices and to provide equal employment opportunity to all has varied from company to company and from industry to industry. In general, investigation of hiring complaints has indicated that the contractor either completely excluded minority groups from employment or employed them only in menial and laboring categories. It was further found that where the contractor recruited to any extent, the recruitment and referral sources in most cases could not possibly furnish minority group employees. Such sources included colleges and schools, offices of public and private employment agencies serving only certain applicants, employee referral by employee groups with nonminority group members,


The type of corrective action varied. Generally, however, contractors took action to recruit from a broader cross-section of the community; established uniform application, testing and interview procedures; and discontinued placement based on race or national origin. But changes frequently were more subtle-and, in many cases, considerably more dynamic-than these generalizations indicate. These will become apparent in the following treatment of pattern changes in companies in certain industries.

There have been 10 petro-chemical companies in which complaint investigation has resulted in substantial alteration of practices and policies. Most of the complaints of discrimination have been in the gulf coast refining centers in Louisiana and Texas, but complaints also have resulted in substantial action in Illinois and South Carolina.

The number of complaints against individual companies ranged from 1 to more than 50. All complaints alleged racial discrimination in upgrading, seniority and transfer.

Complaints against six Louisiana companies charged that Negro employees were placed in labor and service departments, regardless of qualifications. When such employees attempted to transfer to better jobs, they were prevented from doing so by seniority provisions or were disqualified due to lack of education. Investigation showed that white employees of similar or lesser educationa and seniority qualifications had been placed in the more skilled positions routinely and without question.

Following negotiations, the companies acted to provide upgrading and promotion on the basis of uniform nondiscriminatory standards of seniority and qualifications. New hires were placed without regard to race. Two of the companies found it necessary to amend collective bargaining agreements in order to effect necessary changes. Other companies were able to act affirmatively within the scope of existing collective bargaining agreements. All segregated locals have been eliminated in the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union. Within a month of corrective action, 20 Negro employees had successfully bid into positions in the following crafts: carpenters, brick masons, insulators, instrument men, mechanics, pipefitters, welders, boilermakers, electricians and warehousemen. The following case studies also illustrate the previously stated generalizations.

In the case of a Texas company, complaints resulted in alteration of practices to permit Negro employees to bid on positions in previously allwhite departments. And when the company laid off workers, it permitted these employees to qualify for transfer on the basis of seniority and qualifications for promotion as soon as vacancies occurred. The company also broadened the base of its recruitment to include those who could provide minority group applicants and it is actively seek

technical positions. In addition, it has eliminated separate segregated facilities.

In another Texas company, complaints alleged generally the same conditions that existed in the six Louisiana companies treated above. After investigation, the company and union amended the collective bargaining agreements to permit equality of opportunity in transfer, promotion and upgrading.


Investigations of complaints at a Tennessee textile firm disclosed that only three Negroes-all maids were employed in a work force of more than 1,200 employees. A history of exclusionary industry practices in the area contributed to the fact that experienced Negro production workers were unavailable. On the other hand, the contractor was unable to secure a sufficient supply of qualified and experienced labor. The number of trained workers fell below the demand.

The contractor met with leaders of the Negro community, provided machines and materials for evening school training of interested adults, and made arrangements for testing and referral of interested applicants through the state employment service. The contractor has hired qualified Negro sewing machine operators-workers he helped train-both through referral by the employment service and direct from the evening school. Since this action, two other local manufacturers have hired Negroes for the first time.

A complaint against a Virginia textile firm alleged racial discrimination in upgrading. Following investigation, the complainant was upgraded, the company committed itself to opening its training programs to Negro employees and it established contact with Negro colleges for referral of professional personnel and management trainees.

It took a little longer in the case of a North Carolina contractor. It was necessary for the Committee to require the submission of compliance reports before further contracts could be awarded to the company. After receipt of the reports and subsequent negotiations, the contractor submitted a positive program for compliance with the Executive orders for all of its facilities in several States including active recruitment from the Negro community and notifications of all recruitment sources of its desire to have applicants re

« PreviousContinue »