THE C4C FEDERAL EXCHANGE The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C) Volume 4, Number 1 (Winter 2017) ISSN 2375-7086 (Online)
HIGHLIGHTS COMMERCE: A Quarter of a Century Battle for Justice
Greetings from the C4C President The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C) is fortunate to count ourselves among the civil rights advocacy groups that support present and former Federal employees who challenge workplace injustice. Towards this purpose, we share valuable information with persons interested in addressing race discrimination and retaliation in the Federal sector.
EEOC: Reframes Advocacy Groups’ Issues AGRICULTURE: Congressional Hearing: Discrimination at the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL (OSC): Oral Arguments (Carson v OSC) In Memoriam: Diane R. Williams CENSUS BUREAU: Supreme Court Grants Former Census Employee’s Certiorari VETERANS AFFAIRS: The Office of Special Counsel Substantiates Whistleblower Claim DEFENSE: Default Decision Rendered in Favor of Former Defense Employee
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) maintains the ability for “agencies” to send complaint files electronically to the EEOC for hearings and appeals. The online data system is called the Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). The C4C questioned the EEOC about the appearance of unfairness given FedSEP complaint system is not available to complainants. According to the EEOC, plans are to expand the system to complainants who file employment discrimination claims against Federal agencies later this year.
The C4C is also a member of the Make It Safe Coalition. We serve to foster a Federal workplace that promotes equality, fosters employee wellness, reduces taxpayer costs, strengthens our national security, and improves the quality of goods and services the Federal government provides to the public. In January 2017, our internet publication - The C4C Federal Exchange - moved from monthly distribution to quarterly distribution. The C4C newsletter (Winter Edition 2017) provides a wide array of information on civil rights activities, litigation and operations It is our hope that by shining the light on the darkness, we can promote an inclusive government that embraces workforce diversity and fosters equality to thereby improve the lives of all Americans. Peace and God’s blessings as we celebrate a new year.
C4C Federal Exchange Quarterly Newsletter – Winter Edition
Tanya Ward Jordan, President/Founder The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C)
Page 1
A Quarter Century Later, A Battle for Justice Against The Commerce Dept. Continues The Janet Howard, et al vs U.S. Department of Commerce case has a lengthy history. See Howard v. Gutierrez, 571 F. Supp. 2d 145 . In brief, Janet Howard, an African American female, was employed at the Department from 1983 to 2008. She won two EEO complaints in the late 80’s. She asserts since proving her earlier discrimination claims Commerce officials continued to retaliate against her. Joyce Megginson, also an African American female, has been employed by Commerce since 1971. Both filed formal administrative complaints with the Department. Circa 1994, Ms. Howard reported discrimination claims in the administrative process which Commerce continues to litigate in 2017. On October 5, 2005, Howard and Megginson filed their original “court” complaint. On June 13, 2006 plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint. The first amended complaint asserted employment discrimination claims on behalf of plaintiffs individually and on behalf of a putative class of African American, non-supervisory Department Janet Howard (left) Joyce Megginson (right) employees. Commerce motioned to strike the class claims, which the Court granted due to a technicality. However, the Court denied Commerce’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ individual claims, and granted plaintiffs leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. On January 6, 2015, Commerce Dept., represented by the Justice Department unsuccessfully sought to have the Howard case dismissed under a six-year statute of limitations. The appeals court remanded the case back to the lower court, saying the six-year statute of limitations for claims filed against the U.S. does not apply to Federal employees who seek adjudication through the EEOC’s own administrative process. Hence the court has revived the Howard/Megginson case and their claim that Commerce violated Title VII by using overly subjective performance-appraisal criteria that result in a disparate impact on African American employees with respect to promotions and promotion-related opportunities. Read more: DC Circ. Revives Race Bias Suit Against Commerce Dept. The pending Howard, et. al case, which began in the administrative process circa 1994, is still on-going in 2017. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Reframes Issues Presented by Employee Advocacy Group On November 16, 2016, the C4C wrote to Mr. Carlton Hadden, the EEOC’s Director - Office of Federal Operations (OFO). In the letter, the C4C’s President (Tanya Ward Jordan) expressed grave concern about the EEOC’s act of reframing the C4C’s stakeholder’s issues. In June 2016, the C4C compiled and provided to the EEOC its Federal Sector EEO Program Inquiry. The document presented the C4C concerns in thirteen (13) questions. Instead of answering the C4C’s questions as numerically and substantively presented, the EEOC largely reframed questions and answered to suit its interest. In the letter to EEOC’s Director Hadden (pictured at right), the C4C’s President Tanya Ward Jordan asserted: “By the EEOC redefining the C4C’s inquiry, the EEOC: 1) limited the topics in need of address, 2) restricted the information to be gathered; and 3) failed to recognize the actions to address the pervasive discriminatory culture in the Federal sector. Notably, the EEOC’s act of “reframing” issues gives insight into the plight of complainant’s in the Federal sector and charging parties in the private sector who seek an impartial and appropriate factual record.” The EEOC e-mailed its reply to C4C’s Federal Sector EEO Program Inquiry report. See the EEOC’s September 2016 reply by clicking HERE. C4C Federal Exchange Quarterly Newsletter – Winter Edition
Page 2
Congressional Hearing Held: Discrimination and Sexual Harassment at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Last Plantation” Whistleblowers told a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee oversight panel that the pervasive incidents of discrimination and sexual harassment at the U.S. Forest Service mirror similar problems throughout the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). According to Lesa Donnelly, vice president of the advocacy group the USDA Coalition of Minority Employee, there exists serious mismanagement at the office that handles the complaints and Agriculture has been unwilling to rectify the problem despite a mountain of evidence. Ms. Donnelly is the former longtime Forest Service administrator in California, who filed a class-action lawsuit in 1995 against the agency alleging a continuing pattern of sexual harassment, hostile work environment and reprisals on behalf of 6,000 women. Ms. Denise Rice provided congressional testimony about how her supervisor sexually assaulted her and how the USDA continued to protect her perpetrator. The USDA has a long history of alleged race and gender discrimination. Critics of the Agriculture Department often refer to it as –“The Last Plantation.” See video at link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bmu-E9P1664
IN MEMORIAM The C4C remembers our beloved sister and activist: Ms. Diane R. Williams. Diane, who passed away last year, dynamically served as the C4C Legislative Chair and editor of the C4C Exchange Newsletter. Prior to Ms. Williams joining the C4C, she served as a dedicated member of the NAACP Federal Sector Taskforce and a Senior Trial Attorney at the Government Accountability Office. Diane was a selfless and committed advocate for equality in the Federal workplace. In 2010, she successfully defeated a summary judgement in the Williams v. Dodaro employment discrimination lawsuit filed naming as a defendant -- Anne Wagner (with the Office of Special Counsel). “Loving and kind in all her ways, Upright and just to the end of her days; Sincere and true, in her heart and mind, Beautiful memories, she left behind.” Anonymous
Oral Argument Set for February 8, 2017 Against US Office of Special Counsel Oral argument is set for February 8, 2017 in a reprisal appeal against U.S. Office of Special Counsel. Mr. Joesph Carson filed the case. Mr. Carson is reportedly a multiple-time prevailing whistleblower in US Department of Energy (DOE). He publicly claims that the OSC is a “decades-long law-breaking fraud” and that the US Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) is its law-breaking enabler. Mr. Carson asserts that the failings of OSC and MSPB have allowed corruption to take deep root and flourish in many Federal workplaces. See link at http://tinyurl.com/gkwpuws
C4C Federal Exchange Quarterly Newsletter – Winter Edition
Page 3
Supreme Court to Hear Former U.S. Bureau of Census Employee’s Case against the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) The Supreme Court of the United States has granted certiorari in the case of Anthony Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The case is to be argued in April 2017 with an opening brief due in February. Read more about Perry v MSPB No. 16-399. Click Here. [ISSUE: When a Federal agency takes a significant adverse employment action against an employee, the employee can appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. If the Board then rules against the employee, he/she can seek review of the Board's decision in a Federal court. But which Federal court? That is the question confronted in this case. There are two possible answers: the Federal Circuit or a Federal district court.]
Office of Special Counsel Confirms VA Quality of Care Issues Brought by Veteran Whistleblower Oliver Mitchell On September 22, 2016, Carolyn Lerner, of the Office of Special Counsel, sent a letter to President Obama confirming some of veteran Oliver Mitchell’s quality of care allegations against the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In the letter to the President The OSC wrote: “Specifically, the investigation found that the Medical Center’s failure to schedule, or to timely schedule, MRIs placed patients at risk for more complicated and prolonged management.” Background: In 2008, Oliver B. Mitchell. a veteran and a former employee of the Veterans Affairs (VA) Greater Los Angeles Health Care Center wrote to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) to seek redress on a whistleblower complaint he first made in 2009. His early disclosure deals with matters of preventable patient deaths, electronic wait lists and patient timely access to care. Mitchell’s allegations were a precursor to many disclosures later raised by other VA employees in 2014. Mitchell, now homeless, receives a thanks for bringing the matter before the OSC and as stated by OSC as a consequence of Mitchell’s brave disclosure, “the VA has taken a number of actions to ensure a more reliable process for the timely conduct and review of MRI’s.” Default Entered in Favor of Former the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) Employee in Lawsuit On January 6, 2017, in the case of Kirk Webster v Ashton Carter, et. al, Secretary-Department of Defense - an entry of default was issued against defendants Ashton Carter, Jack Rickert, James L. Lee, Patsy Coleman, Theodore Harper, John Zimmerman, Robert Cardillo, and Kenneth Morse. The case (Civil Action 16-cv-02114-crc) involved a breach of settlement of agreement, which the defendant (NGA) reportedly had admitted to breaching; however, according to Plaintiff Webster “the EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (Carlton Hadden) wrongfully ruled – no breach.” For court ruling click HERE. Also see video at link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ5LVbQHcbs C4C Federal Exchange Quarterly Newsletter – Winter Edition
Page 4
IN THE NEWS
EEOC Releases Proposed Enforcement Guidance Addressing Harassment The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has released for public input a proposed enforcement guidance addressing unlawful harassment under Federal employment discrimination laws. The report builds on recommendations from the agency's Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace, which were issued in a report last summer. Employers and other stakeholders may submit comments until February 9, 2017. Click HERE. Pro Se Defendant Writes the Answer Every Lawyer Wishes They Could | Above the Law Pro se defendant in a lawsuit against defendant uses exhibit in a most creative way. Click HERE Senator Looks to Expand Protections for Whistle-Blowers and Hopefully Vindicate All Who've Been Wronged by Reviewing Past Cases. Click HERE.
House Makes It Easier to Cut Federal Employees' Pay, Slash Workforce Click HERE
* Effective January 2017—Individuals must be current on dues to be a C4C Member. ATTENTION: The C4C commenced MEMBERSHIP DUES effective January 1, 2017. Individual membership of $50 can be paid semi-annually with minimum of $25 due by January 1, 2017 and balance of $25 due June 1, 2017. Membership fee may be paid via PayPal or by check. The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C) P.O. Box 142 Washington, DC 20044
About C4C Federal Exchange - The C4C Federal Exchange (Quarterly) Newsletter is a publication of The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C). The Internet publication, which addresses “race” discrimination and retaliation in the Federal sector, obtained its ISSN 2375-7086 from the U.S. Library of Congress in October 2014.
GOT NEWS? Contact Us at
C4C@coalition4change.org
C4C Federal Exchange Quarterly Newsletter – Winter Edition
Page 5