Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 19
Page 1 of 2

« Previous | Next »

Why Do Employees File Discrimination Complaints and Grievances? Advice to Managers and Supervisors

Bias

Engineer
HUD
Tue Jul 8, 2008 9:25 AM

Post Reply

In your discussion: "Perceptions of inequitable treatment", you left out one factor-retaliation.
Regarding your discussion:"Perceptions of bias or stereotyping", the most common form of bias today is that against white males. HUD's Affirmative Employment Policy is clearly a racist and sexist document which is meant to promote unqualified minorities and women.

Grievance

ANALYST
US ARMY
Tue Jul 8, 2008 9:49 AM

Post Reply

I was forced to file a grievance to ensure action was taken in my office due to a recent incident. The "boss" (an Army COL) did not find it worthy of punishment to the individual who instigated it. Only after the grievance was filed - was any action taken. After 36 years of federal service (with always top tier ratings) I finally understand why some employees feel they must file a grievance.

Who's Perspective Is it?

EPS
EPA
Tue Jul 8, 2008 9:53 AM

Post Reply

You are speaking from a perspective of privilege. The idea that preceived discrimination has no basis in discrimination is under mining the existence of this countries efforts to suppress, oppress people of color. The fact that these practices are imbeded in our society and in everything that we do. The minority is always fighting against these practices. It is unfortunuate we don't recognize that it took centries to oppress and suppress people of color. While providing a system of privilege to those who established themselves in power on the backs of those oppressed. To totally eliminate this system we all must be deprogrammed. Because we do not recogized this under world exist we want people to believe that their belief of discrimination is non-existent when we have so many cases that are discovered and even more undiscoved. I work for a Federal Agency and we have over 1000 employees and we have one African American Women Manager. Is there something wrong with this picture.

Re: Who's Perspective Is it?

worker bee
fed agency
Wed Jul 9, 2008 5:35 AM
I'm sure you had some points in this rant, but all the mispellings and improper use of grammar are too distracting. I've seen too many women and people of color promoted beyond their capabilities to the detriment of the agency's mission just because the agency was trying to meet a quota. I don't care what you call it, when people start quoting the total number of people of a certain group within an agency and then complain that there is not an equivalent percentage in the top echelons, that's a quota system. People should only be hired and promoted based on their own competence, not because of some perceived slight that happened generations ago. If agencies actually put this into practice, we'd know the managers were truly the best of the best.

I've seen too much time and too many resources wasted on groundless complaints filed by individuals because of perceived slights. The only group that cannot use this ploy effectively is white males.

And yes, I'm a woman of color.

Re: Who's Perspective Is it?

Prof
Small College
Wed Jul 9, 2008 8:42 AM
There is nothing wrong with this picture; provided the merit principles have been followed. If the merit principles have been followed why should anything be wrong? Did the best qualified employees receive promotion? It appears you are complaining because the agency does have a quota system in place, i.e., affirmative action.

Grievances and Appeals

ER Spec pretending to be an Accountant
Oaklandon Road
Tue Jul 8, 2008 10:14 AM

Post Reply

Lots of employees file because: 1. no cost; 2. more exciting than their regular job(s); 3. official time; 4. can be heroes to their fellow misfits and perpetually outraged compatriots; 5. even if they lose, they really don't lose; 6. they are virtually untouchable thereafter.

Look at the remedy to determine why.

Past President, AFGE Council 222
HUD
Tue Jul 8, 2008 10:34 AM

Post Reply

We can also determine why employees file EEO complaints by looking at their demands for remedy. It is my experience that complainants frequently seek remedies that the system will not give, such as demotion or disciplinary action against the supervisor. In other words, because the employee believes the workplace to be unfair and the supervisor to be responsible for providing a just workplace, employees try to use EEO as a disciplinary or performance evaluation process against their supervisors. As a union rep, I often have to explain to complainants that these are not "remedies" under the EEO process. Therefore, the agency may not be aware of the actions complainants believe are truly necessary to remedy the situation. Mgrs need to carefully consider EEO complaints filed against their subordinate supervisors. They could be a signal that the supervisor has lost his/her credibility and effectiveness with the complainant and perhaps the entire unit.

Re: Look at the remedy to determine why.

Engineer
HUD
Wed Jul 9, 2008 10:37 PM
Disciplinary action against a manager is a remedy. Section 5 USC 2302 (b) “prohibits any employee who has the authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or approve any personnel action from acting based upon:
1. unlawful discrimination (race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, reprisal, marital status, political affiliation)
Employees who commit prohibited personnel actions are subject to:
• Removal
• Reduction in grade
• Debarment from federal employment for up to five years
• Suspension
• Reprimand, and/or
• A fine of up to $1000
The No Fear Act states that employees who engage in misconduct be disciplined. Before No-Fear employees suffered years of discrimination or retaliation at the hands of managers who are never punished for their actions. The spirit of the No-Fear law was that managers were to face major consequences as a result of findings of discrimination against them. These managers do not have a right to work for the federal government.

Reasons for EEO complaints

EEO Mgr
DOD
Tue Jul 8, 2008 11:43 AM

Post Reply

Your #1...failure to communicate is ABSOLUTELY correct... this points to a failure of the leadership to create a learning environment that fosters openness ... and the time to do it. I have processed 100's of cases and this factor is 80% of it...

Reasons for EEO complaints

EEO Mgr
DOD
Tue Jul 8, 2008 11:50 AM

Post Reply

Your #1 Reason is ABSOLUTELY correct. In the hundreds of cases I have processed, this is 80% of the issue. This points to a management failure to foster a learning environment that supports open communications. I have seen offices that were under a RIFF with NO complaints because management took the time to talk to their employees and others that were "too busy" and had employees filing EEO complaints on the hour every hour; they didn't even know each other's names after working together for years. A GOOD technique is the DOD consideration of others program... sit down and talk... TAKE THE TIME and SAVE time. I asked managers what they preferred: 10 minutes to talk or 2 years of litigation.

Re: Reasons for EEO complaints

LR
Treasury
Wed Jul 9, 2008 8:53 AM
Communications is a two way street. Often it is not management's failure to communicate, it is the failure of the employee to hear what is being communicated. I have been in many, many situations where the manager has clearly communicated but, especially if it is critical of an employee's conduct or performance, it is ignored. There's a difference between not communicating and not communicating what someone wants to hear.
Total Comments: 19
Page 1 of 2

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.