As I understand it, previously the Office of Federal Contract Compliance reported to the Secretary. Now it reports to you.

How can you give us assurance that the program will not be weakened? What kind of assurances can you give us?

Mr. FLETCHER. Well, first, above all, I would like to say I have an indepth commitment to making the American system work for all of us. And I might also add that I have spent the last 18 months working with industrial concerns on behalf of the Atomic Energy Commission facility which is located in Hanford, Wash.

There were at least nine contractors with whom I worked and my job there, among other things, was that of putting those companies in a posture that would make it possible for contract compliance to become a fact. I tailored several programs for them that included making sure the top management had made a firm commitment to implement the full and unlimited employment opportunity programs a fact of life there and then I successfully got a commitment out of top management to see to it that management at all levels, including those who were employed in the various aspects of the Atomic Energy facility there, that they too understood what the problem was about. I would like to summarize my comment in this regard by simply saying, Senator, that I look upon our race problem in the following: I think we have two problems. I think there is the black man's black man problem, which happens to be getting himself prepared to function in this society through whatever means we have available for him for that preparation, education, et cetera.

I also think we have what I refer to as the white man's black man problem, and that involves the simple fact that the whites must understand at every management level, right on down to the coworkers, that once the black person is fully qualified to function as an equal he has solved his personal problem.

We then turn to the white society and say you must solve your problem.

My role in terms of being the administrative officer for contract compliance is to make a two-prong attack on this problem seeing to it that my black brothers and other minority group people have taken full advantage of opportunities to prepare themselves to function economically and otherwise and also doing what I possibly can to move any roadblocks toward that functioning that might exist outside the area of one's personal involvement and control so far as helping the white community, the business institutions, and to recognize the need to solve their part of the problem. And in that light I will aim all of my efforts in that direction and toward that end.

Senator KENNEDY. Do you plan any change in the regulations of OFCC at the present time?

Mr. FLETCHER. Presently I am in the process of doing a thorough investigation of the OFCC Office as it is now being administered. Senator KENNEDY. I wish you would be somewhat more specific. This is certainly one of the most important and responsible functions that you have had. You have had a chance to review those regulations. They are not very voluminous. They are listed and filed in just a few pages. I would be interested in whether you feel any of those regulations, from your study prior to coming before this committee, ought to be changed?

28-348-69

Mr. FLETCHER. Well, I think I would like to speak to the problems that I see as the hang ups.

Senator KENNEDY. Well, could you respond to the question first and then go on.

Mr. FLETCHER. I don't see any at the moment until I finish the investigation, sir.

Senator KENNEDY. Until you are finished with what investigation? Mr. FLETCHER. I am taking a good look right now at how the whole contract compliance matter, the OFCC, EEOC, and in the Justice Department. I want to see how they are managing their separate and joint responsibilities in the area of contract compliance under the Government's present civil rights enforcement program.

I am concerned, for example, about the charge of harassment. I am trying to find out precisely what business and industry means by harassment. Does it actually exist and to what extent does it exist? I want to decide what recommendations I might make that would change the situation to the degree that it is harassment and then continue along the lines we are going.

I am interested in finding out to what degree and what extent can we come up with the definition of affirmative action. This seems to be an area of confusion.

I am concerned as to whether such a definition is really needed, whether a definition is needed to the degree that it would improve or hamper the operations of the program.

I am concerned about the interchanging of the terms goals as opposed to quotas.

Senator KENNEDY. What is your attitude on that? Don't you think goals should be established and set in order to be achieved, and do you not believe they should be written down?

Mr. FLETCHER. In my experiences in Hanford we were able to increase the employment of minority group persons, not necessarily two or threefold, but an unlimited amount by spelling out what a detailed affirmative action program was

For example, when I went to work there there were a total of eight minority people working there and in less than 18 months we ran it up to 208. I think if I would have put quotas on certain companies, Negroes would have been hired, and then each would have said, I hired my 10, or I hired my 15, et cetera.

Senator KENNEDY. Mr. Fletcher, i don t think anyone is suggesting that we put quotas on. I am not. I have never indicated that I felt that quotas ought to be established. I feel strongly, however, that goals should be. I respect your good faith in this undertaking. But we have had before the subcommittee which I am chairman of in the Judiciary Committee, the testimony of two very distinguished Americans who had long time records and personal commitments in the field of civil rights, Mr. Packard and Governor Volpe, both of whom I know and for whom I have a good deal of respect in this field. Mr. Packard's company went ahead with written employment plans, and Governor Volpe's construction company has reflected the same kind of attitude.

In the Federal Government, however, on the one hand, Mr. Packard went ahead with an oral kind of agreement; and on the other hand Governor Volpe changed regulations without consulting any of the civil rights leadership.

I welcome and respect your own personal commitment. The record quite clearly indicates your own personal belief. But I am not completely satisfied that those responsibilities with which you are charged can be fulfilled just be saying that you are personally committed to these questions without some kind of recognition for adherence to the regulations. If you do not believe those regulations are adequate, or if you think they ought to be modified or changed, then I think we ought to know that.

If you haven't had sufficient time to study that problem, then perhaps you should return to this committee, at a later time, when you are prepared to respond on the questions of the regulations as well as on your own attitudes toward the question of establishing goals and on whether you feel that these contracts ought to be written. I would be extremely reluctant to have this procedure moved forward until we had some more specific response in some of the these areas, so at least we have some idea about what you feel in a professional way your responsibility is for fulfilling your obligation.

The distinguished Secretary of Labor, Mr. Shultz, said relatively recently that we need to strengthen the Office of Federal Contract Compliance. We are on the way to getting it in and then we see Mr. Shultz give you the prime responsibility on reporting. The OFCC used to report to the Secretary and now it reports to you, and I would like to get a somewhat clearer idea as to exactly what your views are on some of these matters.

Mr. FLETCHER. As far as the regulations are concerned today, Senator, the manner in which they are written, and until they are changed I will see to it that they are enforced as they are now written. I will see to it that we follow the guidelines and the regulations that now exist, until they are changed.

To go one step further, may I say this, Senator. Insofar as contract compliance, civil rights, and other areas of concern, may I say that since I finished college, besides having had some professional experience, I have also carried ice, built towers and several other things that were not professional. And I think there are probably few people who know better than I do how important it is to get a chance to use your skills and your human resources, after you develop your potential into a resource that can be used.

For me to sit here presently and say that I am so completely familiar with the contract compliance program that I do presently know where the changes need to be made, without first having an opportunity to complete an in-depth investigation, aim at making sure that the changes that I recommend will improve the quality of the program rather than hampering it, would lead to further confusion, hurt the program and be a mistake.

I would also like to point out that we are moving from an area of sociological definitions to one of legal definitions. We are moving from an area where it was at one time fine for social workers and sociologists to do investigations based on sociological concepts as regards to enforcing contract compliance, but today these people are finding it a bit difficult to come up with a kind of investigation that will stand up in court. We are talking about legal procedures now. This means we must take a good look at what has to be done before deciding on solid recommendations that will prevail. As I think it has been stated here,

it is easy to get a change put into effect, but if it turns out to be a mistake, it is pretty hard to get it removed.

Whatever recommendation I may make to the OFCC program, I want to be sure they are improvements, the kind that will expedite procedures and the goals we are after. Until that time, I think I would stand and say until we have completed a detailed investigation of the areas of confusion, areas of conflict, and have spelled out in a very clear fashion so that management knows exactly where it stands and Government knows exactly where its responsibilities begin and end, and also so that the would-be employer would know and clearly understand his responsibility, I will only say for the moment that I will enforce the law as it is now defined and will follow the guidelines as they now exist.

Senator KENNEDY. Well, as an experienced official that concerns itself with the issue in the past. Do you feel that management would have a clearer idea of where they stood, using your own definition, if they were to write down their agreements for the fulfillment of their contract? Do you think that could be best done by oral agreements?

Mr. FLETCHER. Well, I think that, as I understood it, as I implemented it at Hanford, I asked those contractors to draft their own affirmative action programs, establish their own methods and means of achieving what it was they had in mind of achieving so far as equal employment opportunities were concerned.

Senator KENNEDY. Now the regulations at this time require that there be a written affirmative action program.

Do you believe that affirmative action programs should be written. as a term of the contract, as regulations at the present time require? Mr. FLETCHER. I look at affirmative action as if it were a covenant in the contract to be honored in the same fashion as all other covenants in contracts should be and, therefore, I think it should be drafted.

Senator KENNEDY. Do you also favor within that covenant the establishment of goals and timetables, leading out quite precisely to the question of goals and timetables in borrow plate language? Do you think they ought to be included in any affirmative action program?

Mr. FLETCHER. I think that goals and timetables are essential to the extent that they fall short of establishing quotas, so that the company, including other persons, can find out how well it is doing on its own commitment.

I think it is imperative, for example, for a business or company to have sensitivity training sessions for line supervisors. In this regard, for example, if it is to be understood that such a commitment is in fact being made, a commitment to have 10 sensitivity training sessions within the next 6 or 10 or 15 weeks, I think it is imperative that this be written into the contract so that the company understands that it is obligated to hold these sensitivity training sessions and they have a timetable for holding them.

And in addition, written commitments would make it possible for the field investigator to return to the company and find our whether the company has fulfilled the commitment in question, in case he is curious to know how they are performing in terms of sensitivity training and what good they got out of it.

Senator KENNEDY. In this question I want you to understand that I am not attempting to elicit responses from you to tie you on into a situation where you think those regulations can be modified and strengthened or improved, but rather to gather at least a clearer idea as to the import you place on the regulations. I do think that it is important in achieving the purposes of the OFCC to emphasize written affirmative action programs, and establishing goals, and the whole host of other procedures which have been written into those regulations. These things are extremely critical if we are going to achieve the objectives which all of us are committed to. Therefore I want to get your views on the importance of and responsibility in any changes.

Prior to any modification or change in these regulations, will you consult the civil rights groups who will be affected by this?

Mr. FLETCHER. Certainly, sir. I feel it is imperative to talk with the civil rights groups and others who in one way or another are going to be responsible for helping us enforce these laws and/or having to live with the decisions that we make. I think it is imperative we get input from these areas before we arrive at a final decision.

Senator KENNEDY. On the size and makeup of the OFCC, as I understand it, there are approximately 12 professionals and eight clerics. Is that right?

Mr. FLETCHER. I am not sure of the exact size.

Senator KENNEDY. I imagine the whole question of whether it has sufficient budget to achieve the responsibilities which it is charged with would be an area which you will look into, and if you feel that the budget is not sufficient to provide for the kinds of personnel and others that you will make those views known?

Mr. FLETCHER. Yes, sir. I certainly will make those views known. Senator KENNEDY. Mr. Fletcher, when the EEOC makes what is known as a cause decision, after its investigation finds there is a reasonable cause that discrimination exists, the EEOC does not have enforcement powers.

And the whole area of preaward, of course, is a matter of great interest and whether the EEOC should have the opportunities for cease-and-desist orders, in order to give it the kinds of enforcement powers perhaps to do the job. There is wide disagreement on that, obviously. I would be interested in your own view about the importance of the OFCC following through on its procedures and the regulations when a cause decision is made, prior to the granting of these contracts.

There has been considerable question in recent times, and I would like to know what your views and your attitudes on this would be. Mr. FLETCHER. Senator, are you referring to the pre-award proceedings now?

Senator Kennedy. Yes.

Mr. FLETCHER. What is involved in terms of what my opinion is about preawards?

Senator KENNEDY. After a cause decision is found, after there is a finding by the EEOC in regard to certain contracts, they bring this up and OFCC makes these observations. Then, according to the regulations, as I understand it, there are certain procedures that must be followed prior to the time of not granting any of these contracts the question of negotiations back and forth, to get full