Page images
PDF
EPUB

improving law enforcement and criminal justice efforts. The statute prohibits discrimination in the utilization of LEAA grants, and in addressing recordkeeping, empowers LEAA to require grant recipients to maintain appropriate records and to report data.6

State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972-The Office of Revenue Sharing was created by the revenue sharing act to provide State and local governments with funds to help deal with community problems at the local level.

Executive Orders

In addition to statutes, Presidential executive orders have been a source of EEO paperwork and recordkeeping requirements. The four major executive orders related to EEO reporting are summarized below.

Executive Order 11246-This order was issued by
President Johnson in 1965. Part I, Nondiscrimination in
Government Employment, concerns itself with the hiring
practices of the Federal Government. Administrative
responsiblity rests with the Civil Service Commission. The
Secretary of Labor is responsible for implementing those
parts of the order addressing "Nondiscrimination in
Employment by Government Contractors and Subcon-
tractors" and "Nondiscrimination Provisions in Federally
Assisted Construction Contracts." Provisions for records
are:

The contractor will furnish all information and
reports required by the rules, regulations, and orders
of the Secretary of Labor... and will permit access
to his books, records, and accounts by the contract-
ing agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes
of investigation to ascertain compliance with such
rules, regulations, and orders.

Each contractor having a contract containing the
provisions prescribed in Section 202 shall file, and

each of his subcontractors shall file, Compliance
Reports with the contracting agency or the Secretary
of Labor... Compliance Reports . . . shall contain
such information as to the practices, policies,
programs, and employment statistics of the contrac-
tor and each subcontractor... in such form, as the
Secretary of Labor may prescribe.

These and other specific duties indicated in Parts II and III of the executive order have been delegated by the

6 Title 42: 3769 USCA 3769.

17

Secretary of Labor to the Office of Federal Contracts Compliance Programs (OFCCP) in the Department of Labor.

To carry out its responsibilities under the executive order, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs has formulated several administrative regulations which outline the Government's EEO contract compliance methods. The major procedures concerning reporting and recordkeeping are contained in OFCCP Revised Orders No. 4 (41 CFR Part 60-2) and No. 14 (41 CFR 60-60). Revised Order No. 4 outlines the requirements for affirmative action plans for non-construction contractors;

[graphic]

Revised Order No. 14 outlines procedures for agency compliance reviews.

Executive Order 11375-This order amending Executive Order 11246, was issued by President Johnson in 1967 to prohibit sex discrimination.

Executive Order 11247-This order, issued in 1965 by President Johnson, contains implementing measures for enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, "Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance. Under the order, the Attorney General was directed to assist Federal agencies in assuring nondiscrimination in the utilization of their financial assistance.

Executive Order 11764-Due to a lack of coordination among agencies administering Title VI programs, Executive Order 11764 was issued by President Nixon in 1974. Under this order the Attorney General was directed to "prescribe standards and procedures for implementation and coordination of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." The Department of Justice did not publish the rules proposed for the order's implementation until July 29, 1976. The final regulations were published in the Federal Register on December 1, 1976.

Court Decisions and EEO Paperwork

There have been several court decisions in EEO cases which brought about a realization on the part of the Government that basic records and reports on the actual workplace situation are essential to the Government's efforts to identify and remedy discrimination. Two of the leading cases are Griggs v. Duke (401 US 424) and Robinson v. Lorillard (444 F. 2d 791).

The statistics used in those two cases resulted in a shift of
the burden of proof from the Government to the employers
to justify the employment systems.

A brief look at the Griggs case will illustrate how the
Government makes use of statistics in proving discrimina-

tion.

Facts in the Griggs Case-Prior to July 2, 1965, the effective date of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Duke Power Company used racial discrimination in the hiring and assigning of employees at its Dan River plant. The plant was organized into five operating departments and Negroes were employed only in the labor department where the highest paying jobs paid less than the lowest paying jobs in the other four operating departments in which only whites were employed.

19

In 1965, the Company abandoned its policy of restricting Negroes to the labor department. Completion of high school and satisfactory scores on two professionally prepared aptitude tests were made prerequisites to transfer from labor to any other department. Neither test was directed or intended to measure the ability to learn or perform a particular job or category of jobs. However, white employees hired before the time of the prerequisites continued to perform satisfactorily and achieved promotions in the operating departments.

The issue was whether an employer is prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, from requiring a high school education or passing of a standardized general intelligence test as a condition of employment in or transfer to jobs when:

neither standard is shown to be significantly related to successful job performance;

• both requirements operate to disqualify minorities at a substantially higher rate than white applicants; and

• the jobs in question formerly had been filled only by white employees as part of a long-standing practice of giving preference to whites.

Decision of the Supreme Court-The U.S. Supreme Court held for petitioners (Griggs, et. al.) stating that if an employment practice which operates to exclude minorities cannot be shown to be related to job performance, the practice is prohibited by provisions of the Civil Rights Acts pertaining to employment opportunities. The Court further stated that good intent or absence of discriminatory intent does not redeem employment procedures or testing mechanisms that operate as "built-in headwinds" for minority groups and are unrelated to measuring job capability. Moreover, any practice, procedure, or test neutral on its face, and even neutral in terms of intent, cannot be maintained if it operates to "freeze" the status quo of prior discriminatory employment practices.

As a result of this decision employers recognized the need to keep adequate statistics by race, sex, and national origin in case they were called into the courtroom. In some cases, employers have gone beyond the legal requirements for recordkeeping.

Division of EEO Responsibilities

Responsibility for Federal EEO policies, programs and activities is diffused. Broad EEO statutes, specific program legislation or executive orders create an environment in which organizational responsibilities may shift and blend depending on the relationship of factors such

as:

• The class of employer, and the relationship
between the employer and the Government.
-Is the employer the Federal Government, anoth-
er public entity or a private concern?

-Is the employer a Government contractor? A
grantee? And, if so, under what program?

• The type and extent of alleged discrimination.
-Is the alleged discrimination based on age, race,
sex, etc?

-Is this an individual complaint, or one reflecting a
"pattern and practice" of the employer?

• The number of employees in the facility or estab-
lishment.

• The type (s) of remedy sought, such as restoration
of back pay, a restraining order, declaratory
judgement, or debarment of a contractor.

These factors, imbedded in law and executive order,
contribute to the administrative and paperwork problems
that beset EEO programs.

The following paragraphs identify the key agencies with EEO authority and describe their roles and responsibilities.

Key Agencies

The Civil Service Commission (CSC), under the EEO Act
of 1972, is responsible for equal employment opportunity
programs in Federal employment. Under this authority the
CSC sets Government-wide standards and policies for the
internal EEO programs of all Federal agencies, carries out
its responsibilities by requiring affirmative action plans
from agencies, monitoring these plans, providing techni-
cal assistance, and conducting compliance reviews.
In addition the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970
(Section 208), requires the Commission to ensure that all
federally aided State agencies maintain a merit system

21

« PreviousContinue »