(d) Immediate Investigation of Selected Charges Finding. When a narrow charge is investigated very soon after it is filed, the investigation can be conducted much more efficiently and the possibility of settlement during investigation is greatly enhanced. Recommendation.-Selected narrow charges which involve issues of unusual importance to charging parties (e.g. discharge) should be scheduled for immediate investigation. Implementation.-Recommendation approved. Guidelines should be incorporated in the Compliance Manual and distributed to field offices by the end of the second quarter. (e) Investigative Standards Relating to Narrow Charges Finding. There is uncertainty at the field operational level both as to which charges should be given a narrow construction, and as to the investigative standards that should be applied to such charges. As a consequence, inappropriately broad investigations and unnecessarily high investigative standards have resulted in significant inefficiencies. Recommendation.--EEOC Compliance Manual should be redrafted so as to both: (1) provide more specific guidance on when and how to investigate a charge only to the scope of the complaint and (2) clearly identify the file and evidentiary requirements which apply to charges which do not have important class implications. Implementation.-Recommendation approved. Action to be completed by the end of the second quarter. Question 14. Describe what efforts are being made to reduce the current backlog of cases through coordination with State agencies (e.g. FEP) and Federal agencies (e.g. OFCC). Answer. The State and Community Affairs Program will be decentralized to the District Office level in FY 1975 to fully utilize the potential of deferral agencies. Roughly sixty percent of the charges received by EEOC are deferred to state and local agencies, so that the potential for backlog reduction through coordination with these agencies is significant. In order to tap this potential, the Commission is developing new procedures, standards and controls for processing charges. These new procedures and standards will eliminate duplication of effort between EEOC and deferral agencies. Indicative of the importance which the Commission attaches to decentralization is the planned transfer of Headquarters positions to the field and the distribution of fifteen positions to District Offices with the largest number of unresolved charges. As a result of the redirection of the state and community program to improve the partnership between EEOC and its sister agencies, we have projected that 15,000 charges can be resolved by deferral agencies if $5 million is appropriated to this program for FY 1975. This partnership would contribute significantly to the goal of zero backlog growth for the Commission in FY 1975. The continuation of the partnership in FY 1976 is expected to result in a significant contribution by deferral agencies in achieving an absolute reduction in the number of charges in the backlog. The use of work performed by related federal agencies offers a significant opportunity to reducing EEOC workload. By its participation in the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council EEOC is attempting to develop programs designed to use the work of other federal agencies. A number of difficulties exist in implementing this effort, including regulation restricting the examination and copying by other federal agencies of documents obtained by their compliance officers. We are confident that through the efforts of the coordinating council those difficulties can be resolved. Question 15. Elaborate on the current success of conciliation efforts in resolving charges and reducing the current backlog. Answer. The success rate in conciliations (after the Commission has found reasonable cause either in a field issued Determination Letter or a Headquarters issued Decision) has risen from 25.4% in first quarter FY 1973 to 47.5% in third quarter FY 1974 (the most recent period for which data are available). The total number of charges successfully conciliated in FY 1973 was 1,188. This has risen to 2.065 in the first three quarters of FY 1974 alone. The total number of charges conciliated in FY 1973 was 3,879. This has risen to 4,829 for the first three quarters of FY 1974 alone. The success rate in pre-determination settlement attempts (in cases where respondents come forward before the Commission makes its determination as to reasonable cause but after investigation) has risen from 20.4% in first quarter FY 1973 to 49.3% in third quarter FY 1974. The total number of charges successfully settled through pre-determination settlement attempts during FY 1973 was 1,091. This has risen to 1,151 for the first three quarters of FY 1974 alone. The total number of pre-determination settlement attempts has declined from 769 in first quarter FY 1973 to 688 in third quarter FY 1974 in line with a general policy direction to limit pre-determination settlement attempts to those cases with a high probability of success because if an attempt is unsuccessful another attempt at settlement of the same issues must be made after the Commission issues its reasonable cause finding. The rise in the volume of charges conciliated increased markedly with the change in procedure on September 27, 1972, which provided that 32 District Directors could issue Determination Letters in cases where the Commission had previously ruled on a similar fact situation. This change in procedure also permitted District Directors to make and approve conciliation agreements and predetermination settlement agreements. See 29 CFR 1601.19(b) (d). Previous to September 27, 1972, all determinations of reasonable cause and most conciliation agreements or pre-determination settlement agreements were issued by the five Commissioners. The decentralization of authority had the effect of decreasing substantially the time period between the date of filing of a charge and the date the Commission made its finding of reasonable cause and thereby increased the likelihood that a charge could be successfully conciliated. Although there is a two-year limitation on the accrual of backpay liability, the two-year period covers the two years prior to the filing of the charge, not from the date the Commission makes its reasonable cause determination. Consequently some respondents were reluctant to conciliate charges once the backpay liability had become too burdensome. In addition, the fact that the factual setting in which the discrimination occurred may have changed substantially between the date of the investigation and the conciliation attempt tended to dissuade respondents from settling the charge through the voluntary process of conciliation. The decline in the total volume of pre-determination settlements is also, to some extent, reflective of the change in Commission procedure because in the period prior to September 27, 1972, the policy direction was to make a pre-determination settlement attempt on virtually all charges in an attempt to avoid the long waiting period between investigation and the issuance of a Decision by the five Commissioners. This rationale, of course, disappeared once the determination process was decentralized and gave rise to the policy direction previously mentioned of limiting pre-determination settlement attempts to cases with a high probability of success. Question 16. Specifically, provide us with a detailed statistical breakdown of the charges disposed of through administrative closure. Answer. Table 6 shows the total number of Administrative Closures by Region for FY 1973 and through April 30, 1974 for FY 1974. The Administrative Closures are divided into two categories: those which are closed for no jurisdiction and those which are closed for failure to proceed. Charges administratively closed for failure to proceed have increased in FY 1974 over FY 1973. This is primarily due to the Charging Party Contact Program (discussed in question five) which contacts Charging Parties with charges over two years old to see if they wish to still have their charge processed. This was not done previously until the investigator was assigned the charge for investigation. Chairman, Subcommittee on Equal Opportunities, Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C'. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: My letter of July 30, 1974 to you included responses to the questions raised in your letter of July 18, 1974 with the exception of question 4 and end of year data. Enclosed please find the response to question 4. Please note that the comparative breakdown is between June 30, 1973 and May 31, 1974 in place of June 30, 1974. End of year data will be forthcoming in the next thirty to forty-five days and will be forwarded to you at that time. If we can be of any further assistance to you, please let me know. Sincerely, JOHN H. POWELL, Jr., Chairman. Question 4. Provide a comparative breakdown, according to District office and regional office, of complaints which are more than 24 months, 18 months and 12 months old as of June 30, 1973; and June 30, 1974? Answer. The enclosed comparative breakdown is between June 30, 1973 and May 31, 1974 in place of June 30, 1974. End of year data will be forthcoming in the next thirty to forty-five days and will be forwarded to you at that time. TABLE 4.-AGE DISTRIBUTION OF UNCOMPLETED CHARGES OVER 12 MO. OLD (REGION SUMMED COMMISSIONWIDE) |