US EEOC

Charge Filing Process

What is Illegal Discrimination?

Race Color Religion Gender National origin Age (over the age of 40) Disability Genetics Retaliation for opposing discrimination or

participating in complaint process

2

How to File a Charge of Employment Discrimination You may file at one of the 53 EEOC field

offices closest to where you live (www.eeoc.gov)

Or, you may file a charge at a Fair Employment Practice Agency (FEPA) in your area

Or, by mail Free!!

3

Who Can You File Against?

Private Employers State or local governments Employment agencies Labor unions Federal agencies (utilizes a different

complaint process) Must have requisite number of employees

4

When Do I have to File?

For most of the statutes the EEOC enforces, you must file a charge within 180 days from the date of the alleged harm. This number is extended to 300 days if a state or local law prohibits discrimination on the same basis (age requires state only)

5

Filing In person

Check with office to verify office hours and intake procedures

If you need special assistance, like an interpreter, let us know ahead of time and we will make the necessary arrangements

On lineWe do not accept charges online, but you can

use our online assessment tool

6

Filing By mail

Your name, address, and telephone numberEmployer’s name, address and telephone

numberShort description of eventsDates of eventsThe reason you believe you were

discriminated againstSIGNATURE

7

Filing

By phoneWe do not take charges by phone,

but we do answer a lot of questions. Call us 1-800-669-4000. TTY 1-800-669-6820

8

What to Know

Know the sequence of eventsKnow what records or witnesses

may be of assistanceKnow why you are filingKnow mediationKnow what happens next

9

Thank-you

10

11

12

Filing a employment discrimination charge under the ADA: an examination of EEOC and FEPA charges and outcomes

Sarah von Schrader Susanne Bruyère

DBTAC SW WebcastJanuary 7, 2009

Advancing the World of Work www.edi.cornell.edu

3

Presentation Overview

Results from a study of disability-related employment discrimination charges investigated by FEPAs and the EEOC including: – Trends in EEOC and FEPA charges from 1993 to

2006– Trends in outcomes at EEOC and FEPA offices over

time– Implications for employers, applicants and

employees with disabilities, and legal and disability advocacy organizations who represent them

About Cornell EEOC Charge Data Project

4

The research described in this presentation is part of a

larger study entitled Using the U.S. Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Employment

Discrimination Charge Data System for Research and

Dissemination Purposes, funded by the U.S. Department

of Education National Institute on Disability and

Rehabilitation Research to Cornell University for a three-

year Field-Initiated Research Project (Grant No. H133G040265).

About Cornell EEOC Charge Data Project

5

• Data Source - Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Integrated

Mission System

Melissa Bjelland and Susanne Bruyère have obtained Intergovernmental Personnel

Act (IPA) positions at the EEOC, which have afforded them access to the EEOC’s

computerized data system which includes detailed information on every charge the

EEOC receives, as well as those which are dually-filed with local or state Fair

Employment Practice Agency (FEPAs).

The statistics reported in these materials are derived from data files obtained under

this agreement from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The

findings and their interpretation do not necessarily represent the policy of the

Department of Education or the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government (Edgar, 75.620

(b)). Summaries of data are based on our aggregations and do not represent the

EEOC's official aggregation of the data.

Making a charge of employment discrimination…

• Individual who believes they have discriminated against on the basis of their disability can file a charge with either a FEPA or EEOC office.

• Typically, the charge is dually-filed with both agencies as long as both agencies have jurisdiction.

• Work-share agreements control whether the FEPA or EEOC will conduct the investigation.

6

The percent of charges closed with a FEPA office (as opposed to an EEOC office) varies by both year and state.

7

8

9

10

How do outcomes differ between charges closed at EEOC and FEPA offices?

11

Previous research has shown differences in outcomes of charges investigated by FEPAs and the EEOCLooking at charge data prior to 1998:• Charges closed at FEPAs had a greater rate of

benefit for the charging party (23.3%) than charges closed by the EEOC (11.5%).

• However, among charges resulting in beneficial outcomes, the EEOC-handled charges had a greater rate of monetary benefit than FEPA charges.

(Moss, Ullman, Johnsen, Starrett, and Burris, 1999)

We looked at these outcomes using more recent data.12

Phases and Outcomes at Each Phase of the Charge Process

13

Adapted from Figure 1 presented in: Moss, K., Burris, S., Ullman, M., Johnsen, M. & Swanson, J. (2001). Unfunded Mandate: An Empirical Study of the Implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Kansas Law Review, Inc., November, 2001. Page 29.

A beneficial outcome brings direct benefits to the charging party at closure. • Withdrawal with benefits is typically an informal

agreement reached between the charging party (CP) and the employer prior to the EEOC/FEPA investigation

• A settlement is a formal written agreement that resolves a charge before the EEOC/FEPA determines whether there is merit to the claim.

• A conciliation is a formal written agreement between the CP and employer after reasonable cause has been determined by the EEOC or FEPA.

• Non-beneficial closures include unsuccessful conciliations, no cause determination and administrative closures.

14

15

Outcomes of ADA closed charges at EEOC and FEPA offices

16

EEOC FEPA

1993-1998 2000-2006 1993-1998 2000-2006

No. of charges122,456 120,000 67,253 83,960

% of all charges

Beneficial Outcomes 11.2 17.7 23.1 22.0

Withdrawal With Benefits 5.0 4.8 10.8 11.1

Settlement With Benefits 4.5 10.3 10.8 9.7

Successful Conciliation 1.7 2.6 1.5 1.2

Non-beneficial outcomes 88.8 82.3 76.9 78.0

No Cause Finding Issued 52.4 60.2 52.5 58.9

Conciliation Failure 3.3 4.3 0.2 0.2

NRTS Issued At CP Request 20.4 9.4 4.5 3.4

Other Administrative Closure 12.7 8.3 19.6 15.6

The EEOC Mediation Program

• Fully implemented in April 1999• Process that allows charging party and employer

to discuss concerns and ways to address those concerns with the assistance of an impartial mediator.

• Charges are referred to the mediation program soon after being filed and typically prior to investigation. (Although mediation can be requested at any stage of the process).

17

The EEOC Mediation Program: 2000-2006

18

No. ADA Charges

Closed by the EEOC

No. Mediations Conducted

for ADA Charges

% of ADA charges with

where mediation conducted

% of mediations

with a resolution

2000 17,514 2,386 13.6 63.02001 18,074 2,579 14.3 63.92002 17,520 2,549 14.6 65.62003 17,808 2,657 14.9 65.22004 16,875 2,567 15.2 65.42005 16,080 2,585 16.1 68.92006 16,129 2,684 16.6 70.6

2000-2006 120,000 18,007 15.0 66.1

EEOC Mediation Resolutions 2000-2006

• 66.1% (11,908 out of 18,007) of mediations resulted in a resolution.

• Of the 11,908 resolutions:

– 26.1% were withdrawn with benefits

– 71.6% were settled with benefits

– 2.2% CP withdrew -- no benefits

19

Outcomes of ADA closed charges at EEOC and FEPA offices

20

EEOC FEPA

1993-1998 2000-2006 1993-1998 2000-2006

No. of charges122,456 120,000 67,253 83,960

% of all charges

Beneficial Outcomes 11.2 17.7 23.1 22.0

Withdrawal With Benefits 5.0 4.8 10.8 11.1

Settlement With Benefits 4.5 10.3 10.8 9.7

Successful Conciliation 1.7 2.6 1.5 1.2

Non-beneficial outcomes 88.8 82.3 76.9 78.0

No Cause Finding Issued 52.4 60.2 52.5 58.9

Conciliation Failure 3.3 4.3 0.2 0.2

NRTS Issued At CP Request 20.4 9.4 4.5 3.4

Other Administrative Closure 12.7 8.3 19.6 15.6

21

Percent of ADA charges that received various types of benefits

22

EEOC FEPA1993-1998 2000-2006 1993-1998 2000-2006

Number of charges with beneficial outcome 13,725 21,284 15,557 18,459Number of charges with benefit type information (% of all charges)

12,699 (92.5)

20,956 (98.5)

11,885 (76.4)

15,179 (82.2)

Among charges with beneficial outcome, percent with:

Any Monetary Benefit 80.0 79.6 66.5 64.3

Actual Monetary Benefit 63.8 72.0 61.1 58.9

Projected Monetary Benefit 24.4 15.7 6.8 6.6

Any non-monetary benefit 37.0 49.7 48.1 48.5

Outcomes of Mediation Process 2000-2006:

• Of the 21,284 EEOC charges that resulted in a beneficial outcome for the charging party, 11,640 – or 54.7% -- came to this resolution through the mediation process.

• Of the 11,556 mediation resolutions with benefit type data: – 87.7% received a monetary benefit (median benefit of

$8000)– 49.6% received a non-monetary benefit

23

Implications• Individuals with disabilities filing a disability

discrimination claim and disability and legal advocates representing them should be aware that mediation may be a most desirable approach in resolving a workplace accommodation or disability discrimination related concern.

• Employers should encourage an informal interaction process to resolve disputes, and also become familiar with local mediation resources.

24

25

Susanne Bruyèresmb23@cornell.edu

Sarah von Schradersv282@cornell.edu

Employment and Disability InstituteCornell UniversitySchool of Industrial and Labor Relations201 ILR Extension BuildingIthaca, New York 14853t. 607.254.8088tty. 607.255.2891f. 607.255.2763

www.edi.cornell.edu