I would like to commend the good work that has already been done. Please continue to reform the EEOC so that civil rights enforcement will be reinvigorated. Also, efforts should be maintained so that civil rights enforcement should be reinvigorated in federal agencies. In my opinion, when civil rights are not enforced, this could permit alot of waste, and abuse and inefficiencies to occur within federal agencies. I
I would like to commend the good work that has already been done. Please continue to reform the EEOC so that civil rights enforcement will be reinvigorated. Also, efforts should be maintained so that civil rights enforcement should be reinvigorated in federal agencies. In my opinion, when civil rights are not enforced, this could permit alot of waste, and abuse and inefficiencies to occur within federal agencies. I would like to give specifics about my own agency - however, I'm not sure if I'm permitted to. Here are some hypothetical examples: ,if, for example, all of the EEO cases from a particular agency, are routinely shunted to the same one or two judges who have a reputation for underenforcing the civil rights laws - for example, only finding discrimination ifindings in 1 or 2 times in a 5 to 10 year period, then this can allow for alot of inefficiencies, and government waste to occur within that particular agency - such as disruption of the economy and even innovation. I agree with the report given to the UN that improvement on civil rights enforcement is a valid goal sought by the US. I think this will help towards "winning the future". I also agree that some battles can be compromised on, while others do not deserve compromise. I believe that the area of civil rights is one area where compromise will not work, if compromise is defined as not enforcing the civil rights for all, including racial minorities. A "go slow" approach to the civil rights of certain racial minorities will not work for the US - because the US needs to utilize and develop the talent of all of its people if its going to win the future. I also believe that the Office of General Counsels within Federal Agencies should be reigned in, reconstituted so that they don't defend inefficient , wasteful practices at the expense of the agency and agency operations and employees. Federal agencies's general counsels should not engage in litigation tactics that are so aggressive that amount to bullying civil rights litigants who are employees. By this I mean, that federal agencies's offices of general counsels should not be akin to trademark "bullies" - but in the arena of civil rights litigation instead of "trademarks" - where they engage in aggressive litigation tactics to attempt to defend their agencies beyond a reasonable interpretation of the Civil Rights laws - this involves harrassing the plaintiff with reams of motions for example, that they know they can't win, but they know will overwhelm the small entity employee. Also, General Counsel lawyers in agencies should not engage in tactics that demean employees in motions to the EEOC - based on racial stereotypes. This is also a form of "bullying". The approach to civil rights should not be to sweep the civil rights issue under the rug- or to "bully" employees so that this is the outcome - employees should have a "legitimate" option of pursuing legitimate civil rights claims in "just" courts - that will actually be enforcing the civil rights laws. It is going to cut inefficiency in government to deal with federal managers who "bully" their employees on the issue of race, gender, etc. - because if employees are permitted to work in an environment where "bullying" is addressed and punished and not tolerated- then they themselves, will be permitted to function optimally.
full details »