Many employees, especially in America are faced with discrimination either in schools or in work places. The case at hand is about John. He, being a federal employee files a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against his employer, who heads the agency he is working for. He takes this initiative because as per the Code of Federal Regulations, each employee has a right to file complaint for an equal employment opportunity with the agency.
A charge filed with EEOC will also automatically be filled with Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs) since they work hand in hand to avoid effort doubling-up of charge processing. Moreover, it is determined within a short period of time (EEOC, 2009). In John’s case, since he is the aggrieved person, prior to his the case filing, he will first consult with an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) officer in an attempt to decide the discrimination matter casually. During the forty five days EEO process, John is mandated to have his own representative, probably an attorney.
During this period, the counselor should be neutral to both the employer agency and John. The counselor will offer John a variety of the available legal choices. After having gone through his rights and responsibilities list provided by the counselor, John has to raise a counseling matter; otherwise the formal EEO complaint is discharged. If a concrete resolution is not realized, then this paves way for the aggrieved person, in this case John, to file a formal EEO complaint with a federal district court.
This is because all the available administrative remedies have been exhausted. However, before John can file a formal complaint, he must have received a notice of final interview from the EEO counselor. Moreover, he must be provided with an apposite official of his employer agency. The right to file a formal complaint has to be effected within Fifteen days after receiving the aforementioned notice (Bernnett & Hartman, 2007). When John is filing this complaint in person, he has to go to the meeting with any papers or information that will aid the EEOC figure out his case.
This may include a letter or notice indicating his performance evaluations and also that he was kicked out of the job. Moreover, he will bring with him names of fellow employees, who have sufficient information of what went on with their contacts included. On the other side, he can send a letter containing his personal details, the employer’s details, a brief explanation of the proceedings that he believes were bigoted, the date when these discriminatory events took place and the number of the employees in the company.
The inequitable dealings have to be unambiguous, for instance, John has to state whether he was fired, harassed or demoted. Additionally, he has to give the reasons as to why he believes he is facing discrimination such as sex, religion, genetic information or even age. Importantly, John has to make sure that he signs his letter to give EEOC the go-ahead for investigations. This information is assessed and a follow up questionnaire may be sent to John if additional information is required from him. John has to be timely and follow the aforesaid EEOC procedures so as to avoid from being dismissed off his complaint.
Later on, the information is got into in a certified EEOC charge form. Both John and his lawyer are conducted to sign the form. In the acknowledgement letter issued to John by his employer, he (the employer), will be required to indicate the EEOC office’s address in which the complaint is to be heard, the time that the employer requires to conduct an appropriate and impartial investigation of the complaint filing by John and the employer’s right to appeal to the ultimate pronouncement arrived or dismissal of John’s grievance.
In case John has more similar claims over or related to those of the earlier pending complaint, he has the mandate to add the same. This is referred to as amendment of the pending complaint. For John to be in a position to amend the complaint, he must write a letter addressed to the EEO director of his employer. In this letter, John has to explicitly give detailed information about the new occurrence(s). Furthermore, he is entitled to affirm his intend to amend the complaint by including the new incidents.
On receiving the letter, John’s employer or his EEO director will carefully assess the amendment request with the aim of determining the handling correctness of the complaint amendment. However, if John’s existent claim offers adequate support to the additional claims and does not birth a new claim or if the arising claim is closely related to the former, there is no need for a new EEO counseling. John’s new claims qualify to be part and parcel of the investigation and the same is communicated to him.
A comprehensive and inclusive investigation of John’s employer then commences. This ought to be developed without prejudice and must be factual in all its recordings. The aim of it being factual and impartial is to ensure that the conclusions to be drawn at the end will be reasonable as to whether John was discriminated by his employer or not. During this process, the investigators are consented to with oaths administrations, witness testimonies and proper documentation. Moreover, they must not have a conflict of interests with the aggrieved party during their investigation.
Besides, they should congregate pertinent substantiation that will be employed as a fact-finder in determining whether or not the employer had been involved in a discriminatory act against John. Once the investigation process is over, the employer will provide John with a copy of file in which the complaint had been recorded, the investigation report and the notice of the right to ask for either the on the spot employer’s final decision or an EEOC hearing. The federal district court thus, after the EEOC resolves to file a civil action, handles John’s discrimination complaint entirely as a new case.
Moreover, the assumption that arises is that no findings were conducted by the EEOC. The principal purpose behind the court’s take to handle the case as above mention is to ensure that no biasness during the process of issuing a judgment (Cornell, 2009). Moreover, new and more thorough investigations take place. Irrespective of EEOC denying John a right-to-sue-letter, he still bears this right to file a court case. However, John can fail to receive a satisfying resolution of his case or the judgment might not be to his favor.
If he has sufficient basis to appeal his case, John may further opt to file his appeal with the U. S. Supreme court. In conclusion, although John is very conversant with the legal actions that he can follow in his complaint, he has to consider the expenses he will incur in this process. Besides, his employer agency has more resources than him. So long as EEOC helps protect employees from prejudice, the surety that he will receive a right-to-sue letter from the EEOC is only he is in a position to substantiate the earlier mentioned bases of discrimination.
Bennett-Alexander, D. & Hartman, L. (2007). Employment Law for Business. New York: McGraw Hill
Cornell, (2009). Employment Discrimination: An Overview. Retrieved on 24 July 2010 from < http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/Employment_discrimination>
EEOC, (2009). The Digest of Equal Employment Opportunity Law. Retrieved on 24 July 2010 from < http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/digest/xx-1.cfm>