Home| Postal News | Your Rights | PostalMall | Editorials | Resources | Links | About | What's New | Sitemap | Search|
USPS Information
| On this page: NO FEAR ACT Data on USPS Website updated September 2005 |
|
CFR Regulations on Postal Employees Representing other Employees in EEO Cases Excerpts from EEOC's Annual Report on the Federal Work Force Fiscal Year 2003 The Act in a nutshell Excerpt EEOC notice in the Federal Register Management Directive 715 from EEOC OPM's Federal Register Notice USPS News article : New EEO office-Centralized location will serve employees better EEOC 2002 Discrimination Complaint Stats on USPS
|
Overview
A complainant who is an employee of an agency shall have a reasonable amount of
official time, if otherwise on duty, to prepare an EEO complaint and to respond
to agency and EEOC requests for information. If the complainant has designated
another agency employee as a representative, that employee shall have a
reasonable amount of official time, if otherwise on duty, to prepare the
complaint and respond to agency and EEOC requests for information. 29 CFR
1614.605 (b).
PART 1614--FEDERAL SECTOR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Subpart F--Matters of General Applicability
Sec. 1614.605 Representation and official time.
(a) At any stage in the processing of a complaint, including
the counseling stage Sec. 1614.105, the complainant shall have the right to
be accompanied, represented, and advised by a representative of
complainant's choice.
(b) If the complainant is an employee of the agency, he or she shall have a reasonable amount of official time, if otherwise on duty, to prepare the complaint and to respond to agency and EEOC requests for information. If the complainant is an employee of the agency and he designates another employee of the agency as his or her representative, the representative shall have a reasonable amount of official time, if otherwise on duty, to prepare the complaint and respond to agency and EEOC requests for information. The agency is not obligated to change work schedules, incur overtime wages, or pay travel expenses to facilitate the choice of a specific representative or to allow the complainant and representative to confer. The complainant and representative, if employed by the agency and otherwise in a pay status, shall be on official time, regardless of their tour of duty, when their presence is authorized or required by the agency or the Commission during the investigation, informal adjustment, or hearing on the complaint.
(c) In cases where the representation of a complainant or agency would conflict with the official or collateral duties of the representative, the Commission or the agency may, after giving the representative an opportunity to respond, disqualify the representative.
(d) Unless the complainant states otherwise in writing, after the agency has received written notice of the name, address and telephone number of a representative for the complainant, all official correspondence shall be with the representative with copies to the complainant. When the complainant designates an attorney as representative, service of all official correspondence shall be made on the attorney and the complainant, but time frames for receipt of materials shall be computed from the time of receipt by the attorney. The complainant must serve all official correspondence on the designated representative of the agency.
(e) The Complainant shall at all times be responsible for proceeding with the complaint whether or not he or she has designated a representative.
(f) Witnesses who are
Federal employees, regardless of their tour of duty and regardless of
whether they are employed by the respondent agency or some other Federal
agency, shall be in a duty status when their presence is authorized or
required by Commission or agency officials in connection with a complaint.
[57 FR 12646, Apr. 10, 1992, as amended at 64 FR 37661, July 12, 1999]
Selected EEOC cases
An agency employee is entitled to official time to represent another employee in
non-pay status as long as the employee was an employee at the time of the
alleged adverse action. Kwok v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC No. 05940368
(1994), 95 FEOR 3102 .
An agency employee is not entitled to official time in connection with the
representation of a complainant who is not an agency employee. Skinner v.
U.S. Postal Service, EEOC No. 01870477 (1987), 87 FEOR 23674 .
An agency must grant employees reasonable official time to travel to EEO
meetings. Saunders v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC No. 01850205 (1986), 86
FEOR 3300 . What is reasonable depends on the facts and circumstances of each
case. Saunders v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC No. 05860155 (1986), 86 FEOR
22625 .
It is not unreasonable for a complainant to request that EEO meetings be
scheduled while he is "on the clock."
Zuniga v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC
No. 01831980 (1983), 83 FEOR 21338 .
A complainant who was not allowed to change his schedule so he could attend an
EEO hearing in pay status was entitled to overtime pay because he had already
worked a full work week. Edwards v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC No.
05950708 (1996), 97 FEOR 3039 .
The agency improperly denied the complainant official time to fill out a form to
request EEO counseling. Accordingly, the EEOC directed the agency to credit the
complainant with the 1.5 hours of time she spent off the clock filling out the
form. Shepherd v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC No. 05960547 (1997), 98 FEOR
3049 .
Sixteen hours of official time to prepare for an EEO hearing was reasonable
under the circumstances of the complainant's case. Segura v. U.S. Postal
Service, EEOC No. 01841339 (1986), 86 FEOR 20167 .
US Postal Service Profiles 2003
Excerpts from EEOC's Annual Report on the Federal Work Force Fiscal Year 2003
Permanent Workforce: 729,398
Total Reported Workforce: 821,881
- USPS' permanent workforce participation rate for women was 38.06%; for Blacks was 21.11%; for Hispanics was 7.54%; for Asians/Pacific Islanders was 7.2%; and for American Indians/Alaskan Natives was 0.56%.
-
USPS' top four major occupations were reported as Postmaster, Supervisor, Clerk, and City Carrier.
-
In the Postmaster occupation, the participation rate for women was 56.71%; for Blacks was 4.02%; for Hispanics was 3%; for Asians/Pacific Islanders was 0.57%; and for American Indians/Alaskan Natives was 1.39%.
- In the Supervisor occupation, the participation rate for women was 35.12%; for Blacks was 28.95%; for Hispanics was 7.65%; for Asians/Pacific Islanders was 4.51%; and for American Indians/Alaskan Natives was 0.5%.
- In the Clerk occupation, the participation rate for women was 54.58%; for Blacks was 24.85%; for Hispanics was 7.14%; for Asians/Pacific Islanders was 10.01%; and for American Indians/Alaskan Natives was 0.56%.
- In the City Carrier occupation, the
participation rate for women was 25%; for Blacks was 17.29%; for
Hispanics was 9.87%; for Asians/Pacific Islanders was 7.67%; and for
American Indians/Alaskan Natives was 0.47%.
-
- USPS' GS-14 and GS-15 grade level participation
rate for women was 30.93%; for Blacks was 13.38%; for Hispanics was 6.3%;
for Asians/Pacific Islanders was 3.72%; and for American Indians/Alaskan
Natives was 0.65%.
- USPS' Senior Pay Level participation rate for
women was 26.74%; for Blacks was 15.04%; for Hispanics was 6.21%; for
Asians/Pacific Islanders was 2.23%; and for American Indians/Alaskan
Natives was 0.49%.
- Government-wide, employees with targeted
disabilities represented 1.05% of the total workforce in FY 2003. At
USPS, employees with targeted disabilities represented 0.92% of the total
workforce. In FY 2003, of agencies with a permanent workforce of 500 or
more employees, the Social Security Administration, at 2.27%, had the
highest percentage of employees with targeted disabilities.
- USPS completed 15,831 ADR efforts during the
pre-complaint stage, of which 5,906 resulted in a settlement
- There were 20,102 instances of pre-complaint
counseling (performed by EEO counselors and/or ADR intake officers).
7,258 individuals filed 8,487 EEO complaints.
- USPS completed 2,492 ADR efforts during the
complaint stage, of which 657 resulted in a settlement.
- USPS settled 2,034 complaints.
- USPS paid $6,871,832 in monetary benefits:
$526,866 for front and/or back pay awards; $1,363,028 for lump sum
payments; $3,595,012 for compensatory damages; and $1,386,926 for
attorney's fees.
- USPS issued 3,413 decisions on the merits. There
were 75 findings of discrimination issued.
- USPS took an average of 590 days to process a complaint from filing to closing. The average processing time for a merit decision was 630 days.
. . . a new law referred to as the Notification
and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Rehabilitation Act of 2002 (NO
FEAR) Public law 107-174 that will have significant impact on federal
agencies (including USPS) and their Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) programs. In short,
the act is designed to:
1) require that federal agencies be accountable for violations of
anti-discrimination and whistleblower protection laws and
2) require that each federal agency post quarterly on its public web
site, certain statistical data relating to its EEO complaint filings.
The Act imposes several new requirements upon federal agencies including
new requirements on processing of EEO claims. There are nine main provisions
of the law:
1) A reimbursement requirement,
2) A notification requirement,
3) A reporting requirement,
4) Issuance of rules and guidelines by the President's designee,
5) Clarification of remedies,
6) Studies by the General Accounting Office,
7) Posting of data by federal agencies,
8) Posting of data by the EEOC, and
9) Issuance of rules by EEOC.
Mr. Colsky mediates employment disputes including complex multi-party
disputes. He is also an ADR program/system designer who served as an
integral part of developing the world's largest employment mediation program
at the U.S. Postal Service.
-SUMMARY: EEOC is issuing rules to implement the posting requirements set forth in Title III of the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (the No Fear Act), Pub. L. 107-174. Pursuant to the No Fear Act, a federal agency must post on its public Web site summary statistical data pertaining to complaints of employment discrimination filed by employees, former employees and applicants for employment under 29 CFR part 1614 (i.e., individual complaints, class complaints, and mixed-case complaints--but not mixed-case appeals that are filed with the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board or grievances raising claims of employment discrimination filed under collective bargaining agreements). Title III authorizes EEOC to issue rules concerning the ``time, form and manner'' of the postings, to define the terms ``issue'' and ``basis,'' and to issue any other ``rules necessary to carry out'' Title III.
Section 301 of the No Fear Act specifically
sets forth the ``summary statistical data'' that each agency must post.
It requires an
agency to post quarterly year-to-date cumulative statistical data for the
then current fiscal year. An agency also must post year end data for the
five previous fiscal years or, if not available for all five fiscal years,
the required data to the extent available for those five fiscal years. In
addition, under section 302 of the No Fear Act, EEOC must post fiscal year
data pertaining to requests for hearings before an EEOC administrative judge
(AJ) and appeals filed with EEOC. The data EEOC must post regarding hearings
and appeals corresponds to that which agencies are required to post under
section 301. The interim rule uses the same categories for posting hearings
and appeals data that agencies will be using for complaint processing to the
extent those categories are applicable to hearings and appeals.
The posting of EEO data on agency public Web sites is intended to assist Congress, Federal agencies and the public to assess whether and the extent to which agencies are living up to their equal employment opportunity responsibilities. Currently, EEO data, such as that reported on the Form 462, is reported to Congress by EEOC and is available from EEOC or can be viewed on EEOC's public Web site.
2. PURPOSE. The new guidelines also direct agencies to evaluate managers based on their efforts to prevent discrimination and to track disciplinary actions taken against managers found guilty of violating EEO policies. Under the directive, agency executives and managers will also need to demonstrate that anti-discrimination efforts are working. For instance, agencies will need to submit self-assessments to the EEOC, identifying “barriers that impede free and open competition in the workplace” and detailing progress on eliminating the barriers.
One office, better service. That's the reason for the new centralized Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) claims investigations office located in Tampa, FL.
The office will consolidate USPS EEO investigations under one manager. It will use a staff of professional EEO analysts to monitor investigations conducted by private independent contract investigators. The new office reports to Labor Relations V.P. Tony Vegliante.
The independent contractors will bring neutrality to USPS EEO investigations — a long-held goal of the Postal Service. Previously, USPS employees conducted EEO investigations of claims made by USPS employees for USPS. "This new process will be fairer and more impartial for employees, investigators and USPS," said Vegliante.
These neutral investigators — trained in accordance with EEO Commission policy and regulations — will perform unbiased investigations, gather all relevant facts and provide an investigative summary of their findings. Area EEO offices will still be responsible for providing the results of the investigation to the complainant.
"This new process will provide quality investigations in a timely manner for all Postal Service employees," said Vegliante. Employees contacted by EEO investigators should respond promptly and give their full cooperation and support.
Look for a nationwide mailing on the new process coming to USPS employee mailboxes soon.
USPS continues to have the largest number of EEO complaints filed of all Federal agencies.
In Fiscal Year 2002, USPS had 9,931 complaints filed, or about 45% of all complaints filed.
Below are excerpts from the Full EEOC Report- 7/21/03
ADR Participation Rate During the Pre-Complaint Process
| Agencies | Informal Matters | Participation in ADR |
Percentage Participating in ADR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Defense Threat Reduction Agency | 15 | 5 | 33.33% |
| U.S. Postal Service | 28,258 | 9,386 | 33.22% |
| Department of State | 212 | 66 | 31.13% |
| Defense Office of the Secretary | 48 | 13 | 27.08% |
| National Archives & Records Administration | 64 | 17 | 26.56% |
|
MINORITIES AND WOMEN in the Postal Service 2002 |
| TOTAL ALL | TOTAL FEMALE | WHITE FEMALE | BLACK | HISPANIC | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MALE | FEMALE | MALE | FEMALE | |||||||||
| # | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % |
| 751,711 | 283,971 | 37.78 | 169,743 | 22.58 | 84,147 | 11.19 | 75,618 | 10.06 | 38,459 | 5.12 | 17,725 | 2.36 |