Un-Civil Rights and Lip Service May 22, 2013
A friend said today that the "No Fear Act" should be called the "The Fear Act" because that is what is happening in agencies as managers go after whistle blowers and give lip service to civil rights laws and regulations.
We just received a number of comments that were submitted to this site regarding issues raised in the various articles. One commenter thanked us for "bringing awareness to the import of protecting federal employees from whistleblower retaliation."
Another commenter stated, "Whistleblower protection is a nice thought but things like lying and manipulating investigations is just not enough protection. What is EPA hiding about fracking in Wyoming, Texas and Northeast PA? All of these investigations have been manipulated from the highest levels at EPA. Nobody cares. The Republicans think it's great that fracking is going crazy and the Democrats don't want to say anything bad about Obama."
We just received the following comment from a reader, "Yes, the EPA MD-715 was inadequate. But USDA FSIS is plain misleading! The report on page 45 states that there are a low number of white women and that the agency must work to diminish the barriers for them but when you look at table A-2, which gives you the breakdown, white women are substantially higher than any other group except white men. The report clearly shows that there is less than 1% Hispanics, a really low number of African American females - the analysis is way off. When I started in 2010, the report stated that white men and white women were in the minority - it was clearly wrong and what misleading data like this shows is a tendancy to continue the status quo. Not to mention that only 21% of the EEO claims were on time."
We were not sure what report was referenced, so we went online to review the USDA FS MD-715 Reports, finding only the FY 2010 report for FS. The report showed that:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - FOREST SERVICE MD-715 FY 10 REPORT (To EEOC and Congress)
1. The resolution rate (number of precomplaints resolved vs those who file formal complaints) is only approximately 50%, which is low, costing the Department and employees lots of time, effort and money.
2. Of the 1,868 employees who left the Agency, 1,756 (56.10 percent) left the agency involuntarily. This is incorrect and shows that 94% left voluntarily.
3. With all the rhetoric in the report, it would appear that a higher rate of employment for people with targeted disabilities could be accomplished since it is well below any established goals government-wide.
4. The report states that the agency has a limited ability to track and monitor the enforcement of settlement decisions to ensure that internal corrective and/or disciplinary actions are implemented when discrimination is found. Corrective action or discipline are separate actions to be taken after discrimination is found and FS reported 13 findings of discrimination. There is no valid reason why this cannot be tracked and is a requirement under the No Fear Act.
5. The report states that there is a lack of management controls over the timely investigation of EEO complaints. Management controls are an essential part of any system, so there should be no reason why this cannot be accomplished for investigations. There are management controls for everything else - so why not civil rights investigations.
6. The report mixes workplace disputes with discrimination complaints and resolution of those disputes. The resolution of EEO complaints should be reviewed separately since FS has a low rate of resolution for complaints of only 50%.
7. The report cites the regulation that the FS has 180 days to process a complaint and produce a Report of Investigation (ROI) once a complaint is filed formal, then states that USDA's Office of Adjudication (OA) processes the formal complaint and "renders the acceptance or dismissal decision," (Note: A class in terminology would help.) and OA's "average processing days for acceptance of a complaint was 462 days, while the average number of processing days for completion of the investigation by the Forest Service was 108 days." This sounds as if it take 570 days to process from acceptance to investigation. Acceptance/rejection of a complaint is not rocket science. The regulations are clear on what can be accepted/rejected with respect to the claims, so for this to take 462 days means that the system and process is broken, by adding another 108 days is simply adding insult to injury as if it is not the same agency.
8. Of 64 ROIs processed by the FS, 46 exceeded the regulatory timeframe which resulted in a "28 percent timely rate." This is supposed to state that 72% of the ROIs were untimely, not 28% timely.
9. Of 126 closed complaints, 52 were closed through settlement, 4 were withdrawn, and 70 were closed through Final Agency Decision (FAD). This means that over half go through the entire internal untimely administrative process.
10. This horrendous complaint process resulted in 13 findings of discrimination, even with 52 settlements and 4 withdrawals, which is 13 too many employees being found to have been discriminated against, then adding the fact that the agency admits to being unable to keep track the penalities against the discriminating officials (being called responsible management officials), intentionally or unintentionally.
11. There were 5 noncompliance complaints filed by employees that are pending a FAD by USDA/OA, so it appears that even when the FS settles employees are forced to file against management's noncompliance. In response to this travesty, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) was developed and implemented in June 2010 to address improving timely investigations and to reduce noncompliance. Until there are penalties against discriminating officials and settlement agreements are implemented, there will be little if any change at FS, no matter how many SOPs they write.
FS STATISTICAL REPORTS
1. The most glaring statistics in the charts for FS showed that Black males and females are significantly underrepresented throughout the FS. Based on the Civilian Labor Force (CLF), there are 4.8% or almost 5% in the CLF with only 2% Black males (FY 10) in FS. It is not much better for Black females with 5.7% in the CLF and just under 2% in the FS. Further, more Hispanic males are employed than Hispanic females, but still underrepresented as in other agencies throughout the government. Asians are over their representation as in other agencies. The terms underrepresentation and significantly underrepresented are no longer used, instead EEOC is using “participation rates," and removed statistical goals with only barriers still being considered. So - in EEOC terms, participation rates for Blacks are significantly under their representation in the CLF. Some of the statistics are not surprising or the same as with other agencies in that Asians are generally in the workforce at a higher participation rate than the CLF, Native Americans are either higher or lower based on the location of the workforce and/or mission, White women are either close to or under the CLF, and White males (particularly in an older Departments such as Agriculture, Interior, and Treasury) are generally above the CLF.
2. The report then identifies barriers that if and when eliminated will bring equality of opportunity to all! Training, education, communication, and diversity are all key words used instead of seriously considered management direction that means business.
3. As the grades go up from GS-15 to the SES, males remain the same, slightly decrease or go up, while women generally go down, which is typical so that a cross appears showing smaller representation of males at the lower grades, increasing to higher representation, with the opposite for women. White males decreased slightly from GS-15 to SES or from 59% to 54%, while White women go from 25% to 14% (rounded for convenience); Hispanic males increased from 4% to 5%, but Hispanic females went from under 1% to zero; Black males are 1.4%, almost 11% of the SES positions, along with Black females from 2.4% to almost 11%.
4. There are 409 GS-15s and 56 SES positions. While Asian and American Indian/Alaska Native participation rates are higher than the CLF for FS, these rates are not
reflected in the GS-15 and SES grades. For example, there are 12 Asian males at the GS-15 with only 1 at the SES, 1 Asian female at the GS-15 with 1 SES; 9 American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) GS-15 males, 2 AI/AN GS-15 females, only 1 AI/AN male at the SES and zero AI/AN females. It is interesting to note that while Black males and females are significantly lower than their CLF participation rates in the workforce, their representation at the SES level is high.
5. The rest of the report shows barriers that have been identified with the standard issues and corrective actions shown.
6. The civil rights policy statement is issued and signed by the Civil Rights Chief when it should include a policy statement by the Secretary.
7. Over the years, these reports are sent to EEOC annually, but are usually ignored by management and only brought out of their bottom drawers when a letter is received on noncompliance, which rarely occurs.
Finally, in many cases the statistics for bureaus, regions or organizations are combined at the headquarters level so that only one MD-715 Report may be required and the numbers in the protected groups are counted no matter where they work, so that one region may be underrepresented, another region may not be and their number will be counted for the overall total. FS should have their FY 11 and FY 12 Reports posted for our review and analysis.
We thank the commenter who brought this to our attention and hope that we have shown that their comment was on targets with respect to the civil rights problems at FS and the representation in the workforce. We will be providing a summary of the EPA FY 12 Report shortly. This was a cursory review of FS, so if anyone wants to comment, please do so by writing to us.
We just received a number of comments that were submitted to this site regarding issues raised in the various articles. One commenter thanked us for "bringing awareness to the import of protecting federal employees from whistleblower retaliation."
Another commenter stated, "Whistleblower protection is a nice thought but things like lying and manipulating investigations is just not enough protection. What is EPA hiding about fracking in Wyoming, Texas and Northeast PA? All of these investigations have been manipulated from the highest levels at EPA. Nobody cares. The Republicans think it's great that fracking is going crazy and the Democrats don't want to say anything bad about Obama."
We just received the following comment from a reader, "Yes, the EPA MD-715 was inadequate. But USDA FSIS is plain misleading! The report on page 45 states that there are a low number of white women and that the agency must work to diminish the barriers for them but when you look at table A-2, which gives you the breakdown, white women are substantially higher than any other group except white men. The report clearly shows that there is less than 1% Hispanics, a really low number of African American females - the analysis is way off. When I started in 2010, the report stated that white men and white women were in the minority - it was clearly wrong and what misleading data like this shows is a tendancy to continue the status quo. Not to mention that only 21% of the EEO claims were on time."
We were not sure what report was referenced, so we went online to review the USDA FS MD-715 Reports, finding only the FY 2010 report for FS. The report showed that:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - FOREST SERVICE MD-715 FY 10 REPORT (To EEOC and Congress)
1. The resolution rate (number of precomplaints resolved vs those who file formal complaints) is only approximately 50%, which is low, costing the Department and employees lots of time, effort and money.
2. Of the 1,868 employees who left the Agency, 1,756 (56.10 percent) left the agency involuntarily. This is incorrect and shows that 94% left voluntarily.
3. With all the rhetoric in the report, it would appear that a higher rate of employment for people with targeted disabilities could be accomplished since it is well below any established goals government-wide.
4. The report states that the agency has a limited ability to track and monitor the enforcement of settlement decisions to ensure that internal corrective and/or disciplinary actions are implemented when discrimination is found. Corrective action or discipline are separate actions to be taken after discrimination is found and FS reported 13 findings of discrimination. There is no valid reason why this cannot be tracked and is a requirement under the No Fear Act.
5. The report states that there is a lack of management controls over the timely investigation of EEO complaints. Management controls are an essential part of any system, so there should be no reason why this cannot be accomplished for investigations. There are management controls for everything else - so why not civil rights investigations.
6. The report mixes workplace disputes with discrimination complaints and resolution of those disputes. The resolution of EEO complaints should be reviewed separately since FS has a low rate of resolution for complaints of only 50%.
7. The report cites the regulation that the FS has 180 days to process a complaint and produce a Report of Investigation (ROI) once a complaint is filed formal, then states that USDA's Office of Adjudication (OA) processes the formal complaint and "renders the acceptance or dismissal decision," (Note: A class in terminology would help.) and OA's "average processing days for acceptance of a complaint was 462 days, while the average number of processing days for completion of the investigation by the Forest Service was 108 days." This sounds as if it take 570 days to process from acceptance to investigation. Acceptance/rejection of a complaint is not rocket science. The regulations are clear on what can be accepted/rejected with respect to the claims, so for this to take 462 days means that the system and process is broken, by adding another 108 days is simply adding insult to injury as if it is not the same agency.
8. Of 64 ROIs processed by the FS, 46 exceeded the regulatory timeframe which resulted in a "28 percent timely rate." This is supposed to state that 72% of the ROIs were untimely, not 28% timely.
9. Of 126 closed complaints, 52 were closed through settlement, 4 were withdrawn, and 70 were closed through Final Agency Decision (FAD). This means that over half go through the entire internal untimely administrative process.
10. This horrendous complaint process resulted in 13 findings of discrimination, even with 52 settlements and 4 withdrawals, which is 13 too many employees being found to have been discriminated against, then adding the fact that the agency admits to being unable to keep track the penalities against the discriminating officials (being called responsible management officials), intentionally or unintentionally.
11. There were 5 noncompliance complaints filed by employees that are pending a FAD by USDA/OA, so it appears that even when the FS settles employees are forced to file against management's noncompliance. In response to this travesty, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) was developed and implemented in June 2010 to address improving timely investigations and to reduce noncompliance. Until there are penalties against discriminating officials and settlement agreements are implemented, there will be little if any change at FS, no matter how many SOPs they write.
FS STATISTICAL REPORTS
1. The most glaring statistics in the charts for FS showed that Black males and females are significantly underrepresented throughout the FS. Based on the Civilian Labor Force (CLF), there are 4.8% or almost 5% in the CLF with only 2% Black males (FY 10) in FS. It is not much better for Black females with 5.7% in the CLF and just under 2% in the FS. Further, more Hispanic males are employed than Hispanic females, but still underrepresented as in other agencies throughout the government. Asians are over their representation as in other agencies. The terms underrepresentation and significantly underrepresented are no longer used, instead EEOC is using “participation rates," and removed statistical goals with only barriers still being considered. So - in EEOC terms, participation rates for Blacks are significantly under their representation in the CLF. Some of the statistics are not surprising or the same as with other agencies in that Asians are generally in the workforce at a higher participation rate than the CLF, Native Americans are either higher or lower based on the location of the workforce and/or mission, White women are either close to or under the CLF, and White males (particularly in an older Departments such as Agriculture, Interior, and Treasury) are generally above the CLF.
2. The report then identifies barriers that if and when eliminated will bring equality of opportunity to all! Training, education, communication, and diversity are all key words used instead of seriously considered management direction that means business.
3. As the grades go up from GS-15 to the SES, males remain the same, slightly decrease or go up, while women generally go down, which is typical so that a cross appears showing smaller representation of males at the lower grades, increasing to higher representation, with the opposite for women. White males decreased slightly from GS-15 to SES or from 59% to 54%, while White women go from 25% to 14% (rounded for convenience); Hispanic males increased from 4% to 5%, but Hispanic females went from under 1% to zero; Black males are 1.4%, almost 11% of the SES positions, along with Black females from 2.4% to almost 11%.
4. There are 409 GS-15s and 56 SES positions. While Asian and American Indian/Alaska Native participation rates are higher than the CLF for FS, these rates are not
reflected in the GS-15 and SES grades. For example, there are 12 Asian males at the GS-15 with only 1 at the SES, 1 Asian female at the GS-15 with 1 SES; 9 American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) GS-15 males, 2 AI/AN GS-15 females, only 1 AI/AN male at the SES and zero AI/AN females. It is interesting to note that while Black males and females are significantly lower than their CLF participation rates in the workforce, their representation at the SES level is high.
5. The rest of the report shows barriers that have been identified with the standard issues and corrective actions shown.
6. The civil rights policy statement is issued and signed by the Civil Rights Chief when it should include a policy statement by the Secretary.
7. Over the years, these reports are sent to EEOC annually, but are usually ignored by management and only brought out of their bottom drawers when a letter is received on noncompliance, which rarely occurs.
Finally, in many cases the statistics for bureaus, regions or organizations are combined at the headquarters level so that only one MD-715 Report may be required and the numbers in the protected groups are counted no matter where they work, so that one region may be underrepresented, another region may not be and their number will be counted for the overall total. FS should have their FY 11 and FY 12 Reports posted for our review and analysis.
We thank the commenter who brought this to our attention and hope that we have shown that their comment was on targets with respect to the civil rights problems at FS and the representation in the workforce. We will be providing a summary of the EPA FY 12 Report shortly. This was a cursory review of FS, so if anyone wants to comment, please do so by writing to us.
The 11th Anniversary of the No FEAR Act
FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE
No Fear Coalition
Network for Women’s Equality
May 16, 2013
The signing of the first civil rights and whistleblower law of the 21st century took place on May 15, 2002, marking this year the 11th anniversary of No FEAR Act by Congress. The law was passed after thousands of federal employees and allies worked tirelessly and courageously to move congress and the White House to pass the
legislation to protect federal civil rights victims and whistleblowers. The struggle was difficult and fraught with personal and professional sacrifices as many employees who supported the bill were terminated from federal service and their careers ruined from the enormous stress and managerial abuses that occurred during the long and
difficult times. Through sheer determination, commitment and courage, employees continued to expose government corruption and refused to stop marching so that after two years of intense challenges, the president signed the No FEAR Act into law.
The No FEAR Act was triggered by a lawsuit brought by Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Coleman-Adebayo v. Carol M Browner), when she blew the whistle on discrimination inside the Agency as well as exposing a U.S. multinational corporation endangering the lives of South African vanadium mine workers. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo’s memoir: No FEAR: A Whistleblower’s Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA provides an account of her racist and retaliatory treatment at EPA and the subsequent passage of the No FEAR Act.
In a statement about the anniversary of the No FEAR Act, Dr. Coleman-Adebayo said, “While tens of thousands of workers have benefited from the No FEAR Act much
work remains to be done to protect employees in the federal workplace. There are numerous whistleblower and discrimination cases throughout the government that show we need further protections for those federal employees who are willing to step up and do the right thing on behalf of the American public to stop corruption within our government. EPA heads up the list of one of the most corrupt agencies when it comes to retaliation against its employees to prevent them from speaking out.”
Washington Post columnist Joe Davidson reported the horrendous situation at EPA in his 2011 column stating that, "If the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Civil Rights were a chunk of ground, it would be declared a disaster area,” when he reported the decades of nonperformance, citing the Deloitte Consulting firm's highly critical report that "paints a picture of a woefully incompetent and dysfunctional civil rights operation...."
Human and civil rights groups are again calling on Congress to strengthen the protections for federal employees by passing additional legislation, such as No Fear Act II.
Visit www.marshacoleman-adebayo.com, Author: No FEAR: A Whistleblower's Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA and www.OccupyEPA.com for further information on these subjects.
No Fear Coalition
Network for Women’s Equality
May 16, 2013
The signing of the first civil rights and whistleblower law of the 21st century took place on May 15, 2002, marking this year the 11th anniversary of No FEAR Act by Congress. The law was passed after thousands of federal employees and allies worked tirelessly and courageously to move congress and the White House to pass the
legislation to protect federal civil rights victims and whistleblowers. The struggle was difficult and fraught with personal and professional sacrifices as many employees who supported the bill were terminated from federal service and their careers ruined from the enormous stress and managerial abuses that occurred during the long and
difficult times. Through sheer determination, commitment and courage, employees continued to expose government corruption and refused to stop marching so that after two years of intense challenges, the president signed the No FEAR Act into law.
The No FEAR Act was triggered by a lawsuit brought by Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Coleman-Adebayo v. Carol M Browner), when she blew the whistle on discrimination inside the Agency as well as exposing a U.S. multinational corporation endangering the lives of South African vanadium mine workers. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo’s memoir: No FEAR: A Whistleblower’s Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA provides an account of her racist and retaliatory treatment at EPA and the subsequent passage of the No FEAR Act.
In a statement about the anniversary of the No FEAR Act, Dr. Coleman-Adebayo said, “While tens of thousands of workers have benefited from the No FEAR Act much
work remains to be done to protect employees in the federal workplace. There are numerous whistleblower and discrimination cases throughout the government that show we need further protections for those federal employees who are willing to step up and do the right thing on behalf of the American public to stop corruption within our government. EPA heads up the list of one of the most corrupt agencies when it comes to retaliation against its employees to prevent them from speaking out.”
Washington Post columnist Joe Davidson reported the horrendous situation at EPA in his 2011 column stating that, "If the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Civil Rights were a chunk of ground, it would be declared a disaster area,” when he reported the decades of nonperformance, citing the Deloitte Consulting firm's highly critical report that "paints a picture of a woefully incompetent and dysfunctional civil rights operation...."
Human and civil rights groups are again calling on Congress to strengthen the protections for federal employees by passing additional legislation, such as No Fear Act II.
Visit www.marshacoleman-adebayo.com, Author: No FEAR: A Whistleblower's Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA and www.OccupyEPA.com for further information on these subjects.
Not Worth the Paper They are Written on......... May 14, 2013
The EPA is supposed to protect our air, water and land, so why are they using paper to write and publish civil rights reports that are not worth the paper they are written on? The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Management Directive 715 (MD-715) Reports submitted by EPA annually to show that they are meeting their responsi-bilities for affirmative employment and complaint processing are a complete waste of time and effort. The 2012 report lists the Acting Administrator (shown above) Robert Perciasepe, as the Agency Head, who along with former Administrator Lisa Jackson used a pseudonym for official correspondence, and Vicki Simons, as the Acting Civil Rights Director and Principal EEO Official, an attorney moved into the office by former OCR Director Rafael DeLeon. The certification of compliance on the website is not shown signed by either of these officials, neither of whom are subject matter experts.
The civil rights program at EPA has been in shambles for decades because of their failure to manage and operate an effective program in accordance with the laws and regulations, yet the EPA Office of Inspector General has taken no action about the numerous violations reported to them. Instead, EPA officials continue to reward the employees who cover up their mismanagement and participate in their corruption. A case in point is an OCR employee who was previously counseled by his former supervisor for sleeping on the job, calling the former OCR Director bipolar, and failing to carry out his work, who is now heading up the section of the office she occupied. He not only engaged in actions against her, in concert with the legal office and former Directors, but recently participated in depositions. It doesn't take environmental scientists to know that something is rotten at EPA.
Attached Summary of EPA FY 2011 Management Directive 715 Report & EEOC Summary for Agencies
The civil rights program at EPA has been in shambles for decades because of their failure to manage and operate an effective program in accordance with the laws and regulations, yet the EPA Office of Inspector General has taken no action about the numerous violations reported to them. Instead, EPA officials continue to reward the employees who cover up their mismanagement and participate in their corruption. A case in point is an OCR employee who was previously counseled by his former supervisor for sleeping on the job, calling the former OCR Director bipolar, and failing to carry out his work, who is now heading up the section of the office she occupied. He not only engaged in actions against her, in concert with the legal office and former Directors, but recently participated in depositions. It doesn't take environmental scientists to know that something is rotten at EPA.
Attached Summary of EPA FY 2011 Management Directive 715 Report & EEOC Summary for Agencies
| epa_fy_2011_eeoc_md-715_report.pdf |
Whistle blowers in Today's Environment Worse than Previous Administrations? May 4, 2013
| WhistleBlower_Commentary.pdf |
| Black Farmers.pdf |
Does EPA Want an Effective Civil Rights Program? by Susan M. Morris May 1, 2013
Erasing Civil Rights
One of the major issues impacting on civil rights programs throughout the federal government is the fact that many of those in leadership positions do not want the program to work, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) leading the pack, as is clearly apparent by their years of failures and nonperformance. In April 2011, Washington Post columnist Joe Davidson said it all when he reported, "If the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Civil Rights were a chunk of ground, it would be declared a disaster area." He then cited the Deloitte Consulting firm's highly critical report that "paints a picture of a woefully incompetent and dysfunctional civil rights operation....," and further that, "It appeared to place too much emphasis on minor responsibilities, like executing heritage events, and not enough on the critical discrimination cases affecting employees and disadvantaged communities."
As they say, there are often two sides to any story and that's the case with EPA and the Deloitte Report that was issued and rebutted by me as the former OCR Assistant Director responsible for Affirmative Employment and Diversity (AE&D). There are numerous reasons for the failure of the civil rights program at EPA, not the least of which is the continuous filling of management positions by employees without a clue on how to effectively manage and implement the program. Common knowledge, inside and outside of EPA, is that the leadership has used the OCR as a dumping ground for years, transferring in senior employees without prior training, experience or qualifications in the OPM 260 EEO Series, as if it doesn't matter because it's not one of the "important" functions. Instead of seasoned, well-qualified professionals, EPA has placed employees, such as former Contracting Officer (OPM Series 1102) Karen Higginbotham, and former Attorneys (Series 905) Rafael DeLeon, Vicki Simons, and others, in leadership and advisory positions. A thorough review of these employees' previous performance may shine some light on EPA's position on managing and operating an effective civil rights program.
I was surprised when the Deloitte Report attempted to paint AE&D as ineffective along with the complaint processing offices (Titles VI and VII) that failed to timely process complaints filed by applicants, employees and community groups, which was reported extensively by the media after the Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA case. I believe that the facts were intentionally skewed in the report in order to cover up and justify the agency's refusal to submit almost four years of EEOC MD-715 Reports for Congress, clearly violating laws and regulations, and to gloss over their serious failures in processing complaints, and the serious problems emanating from the Director's immediate office. Fortunately, I hired and supervised some of the most educated, experienced and committed employees in OCR, which resulted in the only effective area with outstanding programs, plans and procedures. That is not to say that all the employees I hired performed at 100% or remained loyal because that was not the case, with management using a few in their attempt to discredit me and the other staffs members, but as a whole the AE&D Team was highly productive and successful, hence one of the most outstanding Martin Luther King, Jr. Birthday observances in the area and one of the most active Diversity Programs. The statement that the office "placed too much emphasis on heritage events to the exclusion of critical discrimination cases" is incorrect because these events, thought by some to be of minor importance, play a major role in workforce diversity and in no way prevent the other responsiblities from being carried out. Such a statement shows the lack of understanding of the civil rights program by either Deloitte, the Director, or those he surrounded himself with while the interviews were being conducted and the report being produced. (Note: I was returned on a mandatory stay by the Merit Systems Protection Board during that period, privy to the machinations going on while Mr. DeLeon was at the helm, and not surprised that EPA ignored OSC's subsequent finding of retaliation against me by those in charge.)
The proactive (AE&D) and reactive processes (complaints) and procedures in the civil rights program, if and when managed effectively, assist management in resolving issues that arise in a diverse workforce and enhance the work environment for employees. Annual mandatory EEOC MD-715 reports are a vehicle for agencies to identify barriers that may be impeding equal employment and provides an opportunity to reduce and/or eliminate those barriers. EPA's report was noncompliant and not approved by EEOC when I started working at EPA, so I took on the responsibility to prepare the FY 02 and 03 Reports manually, certify them and prepare an Executive Summary, so that the reports were finally approved by EEOC. This changed in 2003 when the Director decided to pay a contractor $350,000 to prepare the report, but they failed to produce, so the contract was eventually terminated after paying a signfiicant portion of the contract costs. Then another contractor, a well-known expert in civil rights, was hired and paid approximately $100,000 to fix the problem, but it appears that he included barriers that EPA did not want in their report, so for the first time the EPA OGC became involved in the contents of the report rather than reviewing it for legal sufficiency. One of the reports included a barrier that the EPA Summer Intern Program was being used by senior officials to hire their own children, interestingly that included the OCR Directors' children, rather than providing employment opportunities for disadvantaged youth throughout the Washington DC Metropolitan area. Another barrier identified was that EPA was not using the merit system for hiring and promotions. These were simply barriers identified with steps or objectives stated to eliminate them if possible, yet I was directed to remove the hiring of senior officials' children and the failure of EPA to use the merit system for hiring and promotions was later removed as well. So - does EPA really want an effective civil rights program?
Civil rights and whistle blower advocates are attempting to bring about legislation that will increase accountability and penalities for those involved in and found guilty of discrimination and retaliation. EPA caused the 2002 No Fear Act to be passed by Congress, and there is no question that it will again be involved in causing further requirements if new legislation is passed because instead of supporting those who protested the corruption and ineptitude that included civil rights violations; employees sleeping on the job, playing computer games, and shopping on government time; time and attendance violations; merit system violations and nepotism; condoning racist statements; ignoring sexist threats, and creating a highly hostile work environment; EPA supported the nonperformers and clique culprits by giving out Bronze Awards, new positions, honorable retirements, and other perquisites, such as one OGC employee getting a special assignment to be with her husband in another state.
We are hoping that the new Administrator appointed by President Obama will bring some fresh air into an area that is considered awaiting the new Administrator appointed by President Obama, with the hope that she will bring with her some fresh air into a civil rights disaster area or we can just wait for the numerous District Court cases coming to the fore that will publicly air some of EPA's dirty laundry.
Click here: New on Whistleblowers and the Free Press | Mother Jones April 15, 2013
Whistleblowers are important to this country. They need to be protected. Don't let our rights slip away as Americans and don't let the immoral and corrupt succeed.
Transparency and Disclosure? What a Joke! April 11, 2013
The use of secret email accounts at EPA just emphasizes the corruption and lack of transparency in an agency that is supposed to be protecting the public. EPA has been notorious in not following laws and regulations, so why start now. As stated in the article below, "EPA said its policy was to disclose in such documents that "Richard Windsor" was actually the EPA administrator, but Barrasso said he has printouts of emails between Windsor and McCarthy in which Windsor is not identified as Jackson."
To Whom? ToWhit? Tofu? April 11, 2013
Gina McCarthy
WASHINGTON —
Senators sidetracked their confirmation hearing Thursday for Gina McCarthy, President Barack Obama's nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, to discuss secret government email addresses that have been used by senior EPA officials for at least a decade. The agency's inspector general is investigating Republican charges that the secret accounts – discovered in 2012 – have been used to hide sensitive matters from Congress in its oversight role and the public under the Freedom of Information Act. Although discussions about the propriety of the secret EPA email accounts have raged in Washington for months, McCarthy told senators that she was unfamiliar with the EPA's policy to use the accounts. Under questioning, she said she had never used a private, non-government email account to conduct
EPA business, and the agency said McCarthy has not used one of the secret EPA addresses, either. The secondary accounts are reserved for administrators. "I am just unfamiliar with the policy you are reading from, but I will certainly be happy to familiarize myself with it," McCarthy said.
The hearing represented the only occasion for senators to ask McCarthy questions publicly before the Senate votes on her nomination to run the agency. Former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson's secret email alias was "Richard Windsor." Jackson has said the account was used to communicate internally with EPA colleagues to distinguish those messages from the deluge of emails sent every day to her official EPA account from environmentalists, companies, organizations and others. The EPA has said that whenever it provided copies of Jackson's emails to Congress or to citizens under the Freedom of Information Act, it provided emails from both accounts, including the secret "Windsor" one.
An EPA official said Thursday that acting administrator Bob Perciasepe also has a secondary account, but it is similar to his name. Seeking to defuse the debate, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said at the hearing that EPA officials under the George W. Bush administration also used secret accounts. According to Boxer: President
George W. Bush's first EPA chief, Christine Todd Whitman, used the address "ToWhit." Former deputy administrator and acting administrator Marcus Peacock used a secret alias "Tofu." Bush's second EPA administrator, Stephen Johnson, used "ToCarter." Marianne Horinko, the acting administrator for five months in 2003, used "ToDuke." "All of them have used it," Boxer said. "I don't think it is anything nefarious." Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said Jackson's secondary email account differed from the agency's practice since the 1990s because it didn't begin with "To" and did not obviously identify her actual name when she sent emails from it. That practice
was described in a 2008 memo from the agency's records officer to the National Archives and Records Administration about the "possible unauthorized destruction" of emails from secondary accounts. The EPA determined that there were possible lost emails from the alias account of Michael Leavitt, the administrator from 2003 to 2005.
The secret email accounts were publicly revealed last fall by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington think-tank that was tipped off about Jackson's alias by a source and later noticed it in documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. The EPA said its policy was to disclose in such documents that "Richard Windsor" was actually the EPA administrator, but Barrasso said he has printouts of emails between Windsor and McCarthy in which Windsor is not identified as Jackson.
At least one lawmaker, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., made light of Jackson's moniker. "Richard Windsor, that sounds pretty monarchist. Now, a lot of folks would say that is
appropriate for EPA," Vitter said, "but I personally vote for tofu. I think that is more on the mark."
___
Follow Dina Cappiello's environment coverage on Twitter (at)dinacappiello
Senators sidetracked their confirmation hearing Thursday for Gina McCarthy, President Barack Obama's nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, to discuss secret government email addresses that have been used by senior EPA officials for at least a decade. The agency's inspector general is investigating Republican charges that the secret accounts – discovered in 2012 – have been used to hide sensitive matters from Congress in its oversight role and the public under the Freedom of Information Act. Although discussions about the propriety of the secret EPA email accounts have raged in Washington for months, McCarthy told senators that she was unfamiliar with the EPA's policy to use the accounts. Under questioning, she said she had never used a private, non-government email account to conduct
EPA business, and the agency said McCarthy has not used one of the secret EPA addresses, either. The secondary accounts are reserved for administrators. "I am just unfamiliar with the policy you are reading from, but I will certainly be happy to familiarize myself with it," McCarthy said.
The hearing represented the only occasion for senators to ask McCarthy questions publicly before the Senate votes on her nomination to run the agency. Former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson's secret email alias was "Richard Windsor." Jackson has said the account was used to communicate internally with EPA colleagues to distinguish those messages from the deluge of emails sent every day to her official EPA account from environmentalists, companies, organizations and others. The EPA has said that whenever it provided copies of Jackson's emails to Congress or to citizens under the Freedom of Information Act, it provided emails from both accounts, including the secret "Windsor" one.
An EPA official said Thursday that acting administrator Bob Perciasepe also has a secondary account, but it is similar to his name. Seeking to defuse the debate, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said at the hearing that EPA officials under the George W. Bush administration also used secret accounts. According to Boxer: President
George W. Bush's first EPA chief, Christine Todd Whitman, used the address "ToWhit." Former deputy administrator and acting administrator Marcus Peacock used a secret alias "Tofu." Bush's second EPA administrator, Stephen Johnson, used "ToCarter." Marianne Horinko, the acting administrator for five months in 2003, used "ToDuke." "All of them have used it," Boxer said. "I don't think it is anything nefarious." Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said Jackson's secondary email account differed from the agency's practice since the 1990s because it didn't begin with "To" and did not obviously identify her actual name when she sent emails from it. That practice
was described in a 2008 memo from the agency's records officer to the National Archives and Records Administration about the "possible unauthorized destruction" of emails from secondary accounts. The EPA determined that there were possible lost emails from the alias account of Michael Leavitt, the administrator from 2003 to 2005.
The secret email accounts were publicly revealed last fall by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington think-tank that was tipped off about Jackson's alias by a source and later noticed it in documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. The EPA said its policy was to disclose in such documents that "Richard Windsor" was actually the EPA administrator, but Barrasso said he has printouts of emails between Windsor and McCarthy in which Windsor is not identified as Jackson.
At least one lawmaker, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., made light of Jackson's moniker. "Richard Windsor, that sounds pretty monarchist. Now, a lot of folks would say that is
appropriate for EPA," Vitter said, "but I personally vote for tofu. I think that is more on the mark."
___
Follow Dina Cappiello's environment coverage on Twitter (at)dinacappiello
President Obama: End Unfairness, Bullying and Retaliation by Public Officials April 11, 2013
Thursday, April 11, 2013 8:20 (Before It's News) Coalition for Change, Inc.
May 15, 2013, will mark the 11th anniversary of the Notification and Federal Anti-Discrimination and Retaliation (No FEAR) Act. Congress passed No FEAR on May 15, 2002, after hearing testimony that federal workforce abuse reduces government's ability to effectively execute with integrity essential programs such as waste management, pollution prevention, water treatment, food inspection, Medicare, social security and disaster assistance. President George W. Bush signed the Act into law (Public Law 107—174). The law was to "put the bite into federal employment discrimina-
tion" by making federal managers and agencies more accountable to their employees when allegations of discrimination, retaliation, and harassment are made. Despite the No FEAR Act's intent, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commisson (EEOC) reports that public officials continue to engage in retaliation.
The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C), a civil rights group and support network, is not surprised by EEOC reports of “Post-No FEAR Act” surges in federal discrimination complaints. After all, the group says "agencies are more inclined to reward lawbreakers rather than to punish them." C4C cites the case of Pierre vs. Salazar. In the aftermath of Pierre, the U.S. Department of Interior rewarded Craig Littlejohn, who served as Interior's Chief Information Officer, with a pay increase. The salary increase was awarded less than two weeks after the EEOC found Littlejohn "guilty of discrimination."
In light of Interior’s and other federal agencies’ failure to hold public officials accountable for civil rights violations, the C4C recently launched its "Unleash No FEAR" campaign. The social media initiative serves to raise public awareness about how federal workplace abuse endangers the lives and well-being of U.S. citizens. C4C asserts that long-standing and costly class action lawsuits against federal entities like the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Love v. Vilsack and the U.S. Secret Service - Moore et. al v. Napolitano reveal government's tolerance of abuse by public officials.
C4C members say they are deeply committed to exposing discriminatory practices of public officials for such abuse "endangers the nation's security, impedes agency productivity, and leaves taxpayers with a hefty price to pay due to years of costly litigation." Class action lawsuits against Agriculture (Pigford vs. Vilsack) and Interior (Cobell vs. Salazar) have cost taxpayers in the "billions." Hence, a key campaign goal of "Unleash No FEAR" is to close what C4C views as a "loophole" in No FEAR. With respect to discipline for violations, No FEAR only requires agencies to report to Congress any discipline taken against an official who breaks the law. No FEAR does not require agencies "to impose discipline" when a public official breaks the law. Presently, rather than provide for any mandatory corrective disciplinary measure for civil
rights violations, lawbreakers are predictably afforded free attorneys and routinely given professional liability insurance.
"You cannot have a corrective measure in place without an enforceable rule, law or regulations to encourage everyone to follow," said Michael Castelle, C4C's Diversity Chair. "Federal managers, who are in positions of power and authority, too often inflict egregious acts because they can do so without facing any consequences,"
said Paulette L. Taylor, the class agent of the Social Security Administration race discrimination complaint (Taylor et. al. vs. Astrue). Ms. Taylor also serves as C4C's Civil Rights Chair. "Race discrimination in the federal government is a covert form of domestic terrorism which continues to silently have a devastating impact on the livelihoods and the psyche of many hard-working, and highly skilled African-Americans," said David Grogan, a Deputy U.S. Marshal and lead plaintiff in a race-based class action against the U.S. Department of Justice's Marshal Service (Grogan et. al v. Holder). As C4C's Social Media Chair, Mr. Grogan raises public awareness that conscientious civil servants (i. e., marshals, analysts, census workers, correction officers, air traffic controllers) often endure long suffering in a retaliatory culture of mistreatment.
In promoting its Unleash No FEAR campaign, C4C has produced an informational video highlighting the toxic federal sector culture. The employee advocacy group has also initiated a petition. The petition calls for President Obama, as head of the executive branch, to establish fairness within the federal workforce by "Mandating Discipline for Public Officials Who Break Civil Rights Laws." Joining the petition to end abuse by public officials are concerned citizens, civil servants, and community group leaders of organizations including, but not limited to, the No FEAR Coalition, Broken Covenant, Brown Center For Public Policy, Blacks In Government, Federal Employed Women, Government Accountability Project, International Association of Whistleblowers, MSPB Watch, National Whistleblowers Center, Whistle Watch, U.S. Department of Agriculture's Coalition of Minority Employees, Acorn 8, Social Security Administration Black Females for Justice II and National Judicial Conduct and Disability Law Project, Inc. (NJCDLP).
For more information about the Coalition For Change, Inc.'s Unleash No FEAR campaign see article by Mr. Dennis Moore, writer and book reviewer at East County
Magazine.
May 15, 2013, will mark the 11th anniversary of the Notification and Federal Anti-Discrimination and Retaliation (No FEAR) Act. Congress passed No FEAR on May 15, 2002, after hearing testimony that federal workforce abuse reduces government's ability to effectively execute with integrity essential programs such as waste management, pollution prevention, water treatment, food inspection, Medicare, social security and disaster assistance. President George W. Bush signed the Act into law (Public Law 107—174). The law was to "put the bite into federal employment discrimina-
tion" by making federal managers and agencies more accountable to their employees when allegations of discrimination, retaliation, and harassment are made. Despite the No FEAR Act's intent, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commisson (EEOC) reports that public officials continue to engage in retaliation.
The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C), a civil rights group and support network, is not surprised by EEOC reports of “Post-No FEAR Act” surges in federal discrimination complaints. After all, the group says "agencies are more inclined to reward lawbreakers rather than to punish them." C4C cites the case of Pierre vs. Salazar. In the aftermath of Pierre, the U.S. Department of Interior rewarded Craig Littlejohn, who served as Interior's Chief Information Officer, with a pay increase. The salary increase was awarded less than two weeks after the EEOC found Littlejohn "guilty of discrimination."
In light of Interior’s and other federal agencies’ failure to hold public officials accountable for civil rights violations, the C4C recently launched its "Unleash No FEAR" campaign. The social media initiative serves to raise public awareness about how federal workplace abuse endangers the lives and well-being of U.S. citizens. C4C asserts that long-standing and costly class action lawsuits against federal entities like the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Love v. Vilsack and the U.S. Secret Service - Moore et. al v. Napolitano reveal government's tolerance of abuse by public officials.
C4C members say they are deeply committed to exposing discriminatory practices of public officials for such abuse "endangers the nation's security, impedes agency productivity, and leaves taxpayers with a hefty price to pay due to years of costly litigation." Class action lawsuits against Agriculture (Pigford vs. Vilsack) and Interior (Cobell vs. Salazar) have cost taxpayers in the "billions." Hence, a key campaign goal of "Unleash No FEAR" is to close what C4C views as a "loophole" in No FEAR. With respect to discipline for violations, No FEAR only requires agencies to report to Congress any discipline taken against an official who breaks the law. No FEAR does not require agencies "to impose discipline" when a public official breaks the law. Presently, rather than provide for any mandatory corrective disciplinary measure for civil
rights violations, lawbreakers are predictably afforded free attorneys and routinely given professional liability insurance.
"You cannot have a corrective measure in place without an enforceable rule, law or regulations to encourage everyone to follow," said Michael Castelle, C4C's Diversity Chair. "Federal managers, who are in positions of power and authority, too often inflict egregious acts because they can do so without facing any consequences,"
said Paulette L. Taylor, the class agent of the Social Security Administration race discrimination complaint (Taylor et. al. vs. Astrue). Ms. Taylor also serves as C4C's Civil Rights Chair. "Race discrimination in the federal government is a covert form of domestic terrorism which continues to silently have a devastating impact on the livelihoods and the psyche of many hard-working, and highly skilled African-Americans," said David Grogan, a Deputy U.S. Marshal and lead plaintiff in a race-based class action against the U.S. Department of Justice's Marshal Service (Grogan et. al v. Holder). As C4C's Social Media Chair, Mr. Grogan raises public awareness that conscientious civil servants (i. e., marshals, analysts, census workers, correction officers, air traffic controllers) often endure long suffering in a retaliatory culture of mistreatment.
In promoting its Unleash No FEAR campaign, C4C has produced an informational video highlighting the toxic federal sector culture. The employee advocacy group has also initiated a petition. The petition calls for President Obama, as head of the executive branch, to establish fairness within the federal workforce by "Mandating Discipline for Public Officials Who Break Civil Rights Laws." Joining the petition to end abuse by public officials are concerned citizens, civil servants, and community group leaders of organizations including, but not limited to, the No FEAR Coalition, Broken Covenant, Brown Center For Public Policy, Blacks In Government, Federal Employed Women, Government Accountability Project, International Association of Whistleblowers, MSPB Watch, National Whistleblowers Center, Whistle Watch, U.S. Department of Agriculture's Coalition of Minority Employees, Acorn 8, Social Security Administration Black Females for Justice II and National Judicial Conduct and Disability Law Project, Inc. (NJCDLP).
For more information about the Coalition For Change, Inc.'s Unleash No FEAR campaign see article by Mr. Dennis Moore, writer and book reviewer at East County
Magazine.
Hostile Work Environment at Agriculture April 8, 2013
Mr. Secretary -
I just received a call from Forest Service Region 3 ER Specialist, HRM employee (Hispanic male). He attempted suicide on April 4, 2013 due to the abusive and hostile work environment he has been undergoing for months and months while he cares for his very ill mother. He was rushed to the hospital and thank God he is alive. He got out of the hospital yesterday. The Agency's harassment recently culminated in a proposed removal against him while he was on FMLA leave to care for his mother. The situation with him is a typical one. Agency management harasses an employee until he becomes physically and emotionally ill and then harasses him further with leave restrictions, AWOL, etc. - misconduct and performance issues until they finally break the person and then - termination. We observe your managers do it more often to minorities and women. You are aware that I contacted you last month about a Region 5 Hispanic, female employee who was contemplating suicide. No one in the Agency responded at any level. We Coalition women rallied around and provided support.
When an employee(s) dies from suicide or homicide this year Mr. Secretary, are you going to apologize to us like you apologized to a Hispanic female employee when agency management bungled her workplace violence complaint? It meant little to us then, and will be nothing to us in the future because we know that you could be taking action on these matters and you refuse to do so. Please correct that so your employees will not needlessly harm themselves or harm others any more.
Lesa Donnelly
NOTE: The names of the employees have not been included until permission is given for privacy.
I just received a call from Forest Service Region 3 ER Specialist, HRM employee (Hispanic male). He attempted suicide on April 4, 2013 due to the abusive and hostile work environment he has been undergoing for months and months while he cares for his very ill mother. He was rushed to the hospital and thank God he is alive. He got out of the hospital yesterday. The Agency's harassment recently culminated in a proposed removal against him while he was on FMLA leave to care for his mother. The situation with him is a typical one. Agency management harasses an employee until he becomes physically and emotionally ill and then harasses him further with leave restrictions, AWOL, etc. - misconduct and performance issues until they finally break the person and then - termination. We observe your managers do it more often to minorities and women. You are aware that I contacted you last month about a Region 5 Hispanic, female employee who was contemplating suicide. No one in the Agency responded at any level. We Coalition women rallied around and provided support.
When an employee(s) dies from suicide or homicide this year Mr. Secretary, are you going to apologize to us like you apologized to a Hispanic female employee when agency management bungled her workplace violence complaint? It meant little to us then, and will be nothing to us in the future because we know that you could be taking action on these matters and you refuse to do so. Please correct that so your employees will not needlessly harm themselves or harm others any more.
Lesa Donnelly
NOTE: The names of the employees have not been included until permission is given for privacy.
Evaluation of EPA's "Uncivil Rights" Program April 5, 2013
Coming up.............
The Tragedy at Manchester is Just the Tip of the Environmental Nightmare April 4, 2013
As I read of the article and letter written to Gina McCarthy, President Obama's nominee to be the next Administrator of EPA, I thought about the EPA Office of Civil Rights (OCR) and their known failures over the past two decades to process complaints filed by employees and communities, such as Manchester, who are being discriminated against based on race. Naivete kept me from realizing soon enough that putting unqualified civil rights professionals in that office is intentional, along with taking adverse actions against qualified professionals. As a civil rights subject matter expert in EPA OCR, I was privy to the numerous prohibited personnel practices and violations of the laws and regulations that occurred over a nine year period in five major areas in OCR: 1. The Director's Immediate Office; 2. Title VI (community environmental complaints); 3. Title VII (applicant/employee complaints); 4. Affirmative Employment (reports and programs); and 5. Reasonable Accommodation (people with disabilities).
Most of these violations were reported to the Administrator's office, senior leadership, the Office of Inspector General, and the Office of General Counsel (OGC) - to no avail. In desperation and dismay, numerous letters were sent to Congress and complaints were filed with the Office of Special Counsel, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - again to no avail.
As Noam Chomsky, famed Professor and advocate for the environment said in 2012, "EPA has a sordid record of discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers and policies that harm the poor and communities of color." (Go to Noam Chomsky website for complete recording). This sordid record may not be well-known to outside interests, but insiders are well aware of the corruption and nonperformance within EPA. Examples include: 1) OSC found retaliation was taken against me for exposing violations at EPA and recommended that I be returned to EPA with full benefits, which has been ignored; 2) EPA rewarded senior OCR and OGC employees who were directly responsible for not processing Title VI and VII complaints of discrimination; 3) EPA uses OCR as "dumping ground" for unqualified employees who failed in other organizations; and 4) EPA spends millions out of their billions in taxpayer dollars forcing complainants to District Court, which caused the No Fear Act to be passed by Congress in 2002 after a jury found discrimination in the Marsha Coleman-Adebayo case.
The Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA first brought the more recent violations to the attention of the media. Articles in OccupyEPA and InsideEPA, along with two major reports by Holland & Knight and Deloitte consultants, outline the decades of corruption and violations. Yet, EPA continues on the same road. This February, InsideEPA reported that EPA "released two draft guidance documents to strengthen its policies for addessing discrimination complaints filed under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits recipients of federal funds from violating anti-discrimination protections.......At EPA, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) investigates these claims and if it finds discrimination, then the recipient loses its funding. OCR has long been under pressure to issue a discriminatory finding, something it has never done."
The EPA was created by President Richard Nixon in 1970 to protect human health and the environment - not for some people, but for all of us. EPA has not had a finding of discrimination under Title VI since it was created to the extent that it would be willing to remove funds from recipients who violate civil rights particularly in communities of color. Years ago, as a senior official with a major Department, I had to threaten a recipient of losing their Federal funds if they did not agree to resolution of a sex discrimination complaint; I agree that it is not a simple matter that is done easily. However, in an agency with 17,000 employees with some of the most intelligent and committed scientists and engineers, among other outstanding professionals, I believe that signficant changes can occur if someone would take the time to listen and not be politically maneuvered, if it is ever going to fulfill its mission to protect the air we breathe, the water we drink and the land we live on. We cannot afford to allow industrial greed and ignorance of laws to destroy our country. Susan Morris
Most of these violations were reported to the Administrator's office, senior leadership, the Office of Inspector General, and the Office of General Counsel (OGC) - to no avail. In desperation and dismay, numerous letters were sent to Congress and complaints were filed with the Office of Special Counsel, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - again to no avail.
As Noam Chomsky, famed Professor and advocate for the environment said in 2012, "EPA has a sordid record of discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers and policies that harm the poor and communities of color." (Go to Noam Chomsky website for complete recording). This sordid record may not be well-known to outside interests, but insiders are well aware of the corruption and nonperformance within EPA. Examples include: 1) OSC found retaliation was taken against me for exposing violations at EPA and recommended that I be returned to EPA with full benefits, which has been ignored; 2) EPA rewarded senior OCR and OGC employees who were directly responsible for not processing Title VI and VII complaints of discrimination; 3) EPA uses OCR as "dumping ground" for unqualified employees who failed in other organizations; and 4) EPA spends millions out of their billions in taxpayer dollars forcing complainants to District Court, which caused the No Fear Act to be passed by Congress in 2002 after a jury found discrimination in the Marsha Coleman-Adebayo case.
The Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA first brought the more recent violations to the attention of the media. Articles in OccupyEPA and InsideEPA, along with two major reports by Holland & Knight and Deloitte consultants, outline the decades of corruption and violations. Yet, EPA continues on the same road. This February, InsideEPA reported that EPA "released two draft guidance documents to strengthen its policies for addessing discrimination complaints filed under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits recipients of federal funds from violating anti-discrimination protections.......At EPA, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) investigates these claims and if it finds discrimination, then the recipient loses its funding. OCR has long been under pressure to issue a discriminatory finding, something it has never done."
The EPA was created by President Richard Nixon in 1970 to protect human health and the environment - not for some people, but for all of us. EPA has not had a finding of discrimination under Title VI since it was created to the extent that it would be willing to remove funds from recipients who violate civil rights particularly in communities of color. Years ago, as a senior official with a major Department, I had to threaten a recipient of losing their Federal funds if they did not agree to resolution of a sex discrimination complaint; I agree that it is not a simple matter that is done easily. However, in an agency with 17,000 employees with some of the most intelligent and committed scientists and engineers, among other outstanding professionals, I believe that signficant changes can occur if someone would take the time to listen and not be politically maneuvered, if it is ever going to fulfill its mission to protect the air we breathe, the water we drink and the land we live on. We cannot afford to allow industrial greed and ignorance of laws to destroy our country. Susan Morris
http://manchestervoices.wordpress.com Go to Website to see photos April 4, 2013
Gina McCarthy, what will you do to protect Manchester?
Manchester residents want to know what they are being forced to breathe!
Next week, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will preside over the confirmation hearing of Gina McCarthy, the Obama Administration’s nominee to be the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator. Residents of Manchester and standing up and speaking out about the human rights abuses they
are being forced to endure and they want to know what McCarthy will do to protect them.
“Gina McCarthy,
If you become the new head of the EPA then you must be accountable for the human rights abuses that the EPA is allowing to persist in communities like ours. One need not do anything more than visit us here in Houston’s toxic East End in our neighborhood of Manchester to know that the air here is dangerously polluted, too dangerous to breathe. Air monitors have recorded levels of 1,3-butadiene, a known cancer-causing agent, in our neighborhood 20 times greater than what is allowed in a toxic waste
dump.
Nearly all children here have persistent coughs, and we are plagued with sickness and headaches. We have come forward and documented countless stories of our
illnesses and disease such as asthma, leukemia, and a variety of cancers all of which we attribute to the presence of the ever growing petrochemical industry. We are being poisoned and we want to know why this is being allowed.
We know that Valero and LyondellBasell routinely violate EPA laws and regulations, and that these corporations prosper at our expense. Manchester is almost
completely Latino, and the average family here lives below the poverty line. The University of Texas’ School of Public Health has determined that we are forcibly
being exposed to 7 different carcinogenic substances at any given time. This is environmental racism.
We live at the terminus of the toxic Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. We have not been given a voice and we do not consent to tar sands refining in our community.
Based on self reported data from these corporations, we know that refineries that will process tar sands like Valero and LyondellBasell can not operate within federal law. Tar sands pipelines are leaking all over North America, just look at the health and environmental impacts that the community of Mayflower, Arkansas are experiencing. Something must be done to protect our community from toxic tar sands spills and emissions from the refining process.
Since our neighborhood has become a sacrifice zone for industry, we demand that those in our community who wish to leave and live somewhere safer be provided a fair
price for their homes. The corporations who are responsible for polluting our neighborhood must be prosecuted and the funds be given to residents of Manchester as a form of compensation for the human rights abuses we have been forced to endure.
Gina, will you turn a blind eye to our suffering and let our community continue to die or will you relocate our community to a safer place to live and bring us justice
and compensation for the the way we are being exploited?”
Manchester residents want to know what they are being forced to breathe!
Next week, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will preside over the confirmation hearing of Gina McCarthy, the Obama Administration’s nominee to be the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator. Residents of Manchester and standing up and speaking out about the human rights abuses they
are being forced to endure and they want to know what McCarthy will do to protect them.
“Gina McCarthy,
If you become the new head of the EPA then you must be accountable for the human rights abuses that the EPA is allowing to persist in communities like ours. One need not do anything more than visit us here in Houston’s toxic East End in our neighborhood of Manchester to know that the air here is dangerously polluted, too dangerous to breathe. Air monitors have recorded levels of 1,3-butadiene, a known cancer-causing agent, in our neighborhood 20 times greater than what is allowed in a toxic waste
dump.
Nearly all children here have persistent coughs, and we are plagued with sickness and headaches. We have come forward and documented countless stories of our
illnesses and disease such as asthma, leukemia, and a variety of cancers all of which we attribute to the presence of the ever growing petrochemical industry. We are being poisoned and we want to know why this is being allowed.
We know that Valero and LyondellBasell routinely violate EPA laws and regulations, and that these corporations prosper at our expense. Manchester is almost
completely Latino, and the average family here lives below the poverty line. The University of Texas’ School of Public Health has determined that we are forcibly
being exposed to 7 different carcinogenic substances at any given time. This is environmental racism.
We live at the terminus of the toxic Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. We have not been given a voice and we do not consent to tar sands refining in our community.
Based on self reported data from these corporations, we know that refineries that will process tar sands like Valero and LyondellBasell can not operate within federal law. Tar sands pipelines are leaking all over North America, just look at the health and environmental impacts that the community of Mayflower, Arkansas are experiencing. Something must be done to protect our community from toxic tar sands spills and emissions from the refining process.
Since our neighborhood has become a sacrifice zone for industry, we demand that those in our community who wish to leave and live somewhere safer be provided a fair
price for their homes. The corporations who are responsible for polluting our neighborhood must be prosecuted and the funds be given to residents of Manchester as a form of compensation for the human rights abuses we have been forced to endure.
Gina, will you turn a blind eye to our suffering and let our community continue to die or will you relocate our community to a safer place to live and bring us justice
and compensation for the the way we are being exploited?”
Latino Neighborhood "Sacrifice Zone" - Manchester, Texas April 3, 2013
For Immediate Release
No Fear Coalition
Contact: 240-731-9577
Green Circle
Contact: 607-591-0607
Net-We
Gina McCarthy - What are you going to do about the dying community of Manchester?
Next week, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will preside over the confirmation hearing of Gina McCarthy, the Obama Administration’s nominee to be the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator.
Communities of color, such as the Latino neighborhood of Manchester in the east end of Houston, Texas, are asking what Ms. McCarthy, if confirmed, will do to protect
them and their children from the ever-expanding oil and petrochemical companies that are destroying their health and lives. The Houston community of Manchester is a casebook example of a “sacrifice zone” and tragic example of environmental racism; a community that corporations believe is disposable and its people insignificant. Tragically, Manchester has been selected by industry to be a fertile area for refineries, incinerators, plants and storage facilities that may adversely impact on the health and well-being of the residents. Surrounding the community is the Valero refinery, a trash incinerator, Rhodia chemical plant, Goodyear Tire plant, Texas Petro-Chemical Group plant, Lyondell Basell refinery and Westway liquid storage terminals (massive tanks). Adding insult to the already overburdened people is a car crushing facility, 17 railway crossings, a major highway with industrial trucks inundating the community 24 hours a day 365 days a year to and from the Houston Ship Channel.
Manchester is also a primary target for tar sands refining on the Gulf Coast based on projects and contracts of two of the major players located there. In March 2013, Lyondell Basell’s CEO announced that the Houston refinery was nearly finished with an additional $50 million project planned to allow them to increase their tar sands refining capacity to 175,000 barrels a day. Valero has contract rights with TransCanada that allow them to purchase up to three-quarters of the capacity of Keystone XL. These are admittedly in preparation for the Keystone Oil Pipeline XL, that it is estimated would allow them to refine approximately a quarter of the pipeline’s
capacity.
EPA has a history of failing to process environmental complaints filed by communities under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act against those who receive Federal funds. While this may not be applicable to these companies, the 1990 Clean Air Act amendment provided standards for roughly 160 hazardous air pollutants, all of which must be strictly regulated by industrial emitters.
So, Ms. McCarthy, the community of Manchester wants to know what you are going to do to help them fight the loss of their health and possibly their lives because
they were selected as disposable.
Ms. McCarthy, a horrible situation is about to get worse.
EPA whistle blowers are standing in solidarity with the community of Manchester.
###
No Fear Coalition
Contact: 240-731-9577
Green Circle
Contact: 607-591-0607
Net-We
Gina McCarthy - What are you going to do about the dying community of Manchester?
Next week, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will preside over the confirmation hearing of Gina McCarthy, the Obama Administration’s nominee to be the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator.
Communities of color, such as the Latino neighborhood of Manchester in the east end of Houston, Texas, are asking what Ms. McCarthy, if confirmed, will do to protect
them and their children from the ever-expanding oil and petrochemical companies that are destroying their health and lives. The Houston community of Manchester is a casebook example of a “sacrifice zone” and tragic example of environmental racism; a community that corporations believe is disposable and its people insignificant. Tragically, Manchester has been selected by industry to be a fertile area for refineries, incinerators, plants and storage facilities that may adversely impact on the health and well-being of the residents. Surrounding the community is the Valero refinery, a trash incinerator, Rhodia chemical plant, Goodyear Tire plant, Texas Petro-Chemical Group plant, Lyondell Basell refinery and Westway liquid storage terminals (massive tanks). Adding insult to the already overburdened people is a car crushing facility, 17 railway crossings, a major highway with industrial trucks inundating the community 24 hours a day 365 days a year to and from the Houston Ship Channel.
Manchester is also a primary target for tar sands refining on the Gulf Coast based on projects and contracts of two of the major players located there. In March 2013, Lyondell Basell’s CEO announced that the Houston refinery was nearly finished with an additional $50 million project planned to allow them to increase their tar sands refining capacity to 175,000 barrels a day. Valero has contract rights with TransCanada that allow them to purchase up to three-quarters of the capacity of Keystone XL. These are admittedly in preparation for the Keystone Oil Pipeline XL, that it is estimated would allow them to refine approximately a quarter of the pipeline’s
capacity.
EPA has a history of failing to process environmental complaints filed by communities under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act against those who receive Federal funds. While this may not be applicable to these companies, the 1990 Clean Air Act amendment provided standards for roughly 160 hazardous air pollutants, all of which must be strictly regulated by industrial emitters.
So, Ms. McCarthy, the community of Manchester wants to know what you are going to do to help them fight the loss of their health and possibly their lives because
they were selected as disposable.
Ms. McCarthy, a horrible situation is about to get worse.
EPA whistle blowers are standing in solidarity with the community of Manchester.
###
It's Rotten, Okay? And Once Something's Rotten, it Can Never be Good Again! March 22, 2013
The above from Brad Meltzer's new book, "The Book of Lies," called to mind the rotten civil rights environment at the EPA. Whether or not something that is rotten can ever be good again depends on the leadership and their willingness to change and make things right. So far, through numerous Administrators, complaints and reports, it hasn't happened at EPA - so the question is whether or not the entrenched management really wants civil rights to work in the agency. We believe that they don't.
The EPA leadership didn't need two reports from Holland & Knight and Deloitte, a major jury verdict against them in District Court, the 2002 passage of the No Fear Act, a mandatory Merit Systems Protection Board Order, and an Office of Special Counsel finding of retaliation against a civil rights professional to tell them that their program was rotten and continues to be in shambles. As the weather heats up, it appears that things will be warming up for the new Administrator as she is left with the trails of corruption left behind by her predecessors. See below the latest in a long line of Press Releases exposing EPA.......
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
No Fear Coalition
240-731-9577
Gina McCarthy: Depositions have Started Exposing EPA Corruption at the Highest Levels
The new EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy will not only have to focus on climate change and the toxicity of our air and water, but also highly public trials that are
scheduled within months of her assumed-confirmation. These trials will expose massive incompetence in the Office of Civil Rights, and the inner-workings of a corrupt environment at the EPA that retaliates against whistleblowers attempting to protect public health.
Two EPA employees, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris, will be taking EPA to court to expose its treatment of whistleblowers and the impact on
public health and civil rights. Senior former and current officials within EPA will be deposed, such as Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff to three EPA administrators; Rafael DeLeon, former Director of Civil Rights and Human Resources as well as legal advisor to EPA Administrators; and Karen Higginbotham, former Civil Rights Director now a special assistant in the Office of the Administrator. The depositions will cover decades of allegations of corruption at the highest levels of the EPA. Corruption that has, no doubt, placed the public and EPA employees in jeopardy.
The cases, scheduled for trial in the spring, will demonstrate how EPA senior officials in key positions used their authority to retaliate against employees who raised prohibited personnel practices and warned of dangers to public health. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo won a significant jury award in her case against EPA a decade ago that resulted in the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress. She returned to the agency after her successful case only to face more retaliation and an eventual termination of her career.
Depositions have started at the EPA in both cases. Senior level EPA officials have been subpoenaed and information will be forthcoming that will shock the public.
The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also involved in complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed by the former Assistant Director in the Office of Civil Rights, Susan Morris. Morris filed a successful whistleblowing complaint with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC.) The OSC, in a letter to former EPA Administrator Lisa Jasckon stated that their investigation uncovered retaliation against Ms. Morris for exposing the fact that Ms. Higginbotham refused to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for Congress. EPA also defied an order by the MSPB to restore Ms. Morris to her position with full authority and responsibility. Instead, the agency terminated her employment.
Contact: 240-731-9577
nofearcoalition@aol.com
The EPA leadership didn't need two reports from Holland & Knight and Deloitte, a major jury verdict against them in District Court, the 2002 passage of the No Fear Act, a mandatory Merit Systems Protection Board Order, and an Office of Special Counsel finding of retaliation against a civil rights professional to tell them that their program was rotten and continues to be in shambles. As the weather heats up, it appears that things will be warming up for the new Administrator as she is left with the trails of corruption left behind by her predecessors. See below the latest in a long line of Press Releases exposing EPA.......
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
No Fear Coalition
240-731-9577
Gina McCarthy: Depositions have Started Exposing EPA Corruption at the Highest Levels
The new EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy will not only have to focus on climate change and the toxicity of our air and water, but also highly public trials that are
scheduled within months of her assumed-confirmation. These trials will expose massive incompetence in the Office of Civil Rights, and the inner-workings of a corrupt environment at the EPA that retaliates against whistleblowers attempting to protect public health.
Two EPA employees, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris, will be taking EPA to court to expose its treatment of whistleblowers and the impact on
public health and civil rights. Senior former and current officials within EPA will be deposed, such as Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff to three EPA administrators; Rafael DeLeon, former Director of Civil Rights and Human Resources as well as legal advisor to EPA Administrators; and Karen Higginbotham, former Civil Rights Director now a special assistant in the Office of the Administrator. The depositions will cover decades of allegations of corruption at the highest levels of the EPA. Corruption that has, no doubt, placed the public and EPA employees in jeopardy.
The cases, scheduled for trial in the spring, will demonstrate how EPA senior officials in key positions used their authority to retaliate against employees who raised prohibited personnel practices and warned of dangers to public health. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo won a significant jury award in her case against EPA a decade ago that resulted in the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress. She returned to the agency after her successful case only to face more retaliation and an eventual termination of her career.
Depositions have started at the EPA in both cases. Senior level EPA officials have been subpoenaed and information will be forthcoming that will shock the public.
The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also involved in complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed by the former Assistant Director in the Office of Civil Rights, Susan Morris. Morris filed a successful whistleblowing complaint with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC.) The OSC, in a letter to former EPA Administrator Lisa Jasckon stated that their investigation uncovered retaliation against Ms. Morris for exposing the fact that Ms. Higginbotham refused to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for Congress. EPA also defied an order by the MSPB to restore Ms. Morris to her position with full authority and responsibility. Instead, the agency terminated her employment.
Contact: 240-731-9577
nofearcoalition@aol.com
EPA Employees Fight Corruption in Agency March 18, 2013
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
No FEAR Coalition
Contact: 240-731-9577
Gina McCarthy: “EPA Employees Fight Corruption at the Agency - Will you Stand with Victims?
The new EPA Administrator will not only have to focus on climate change and the toxicity of our air and water, but also highly public trials that are scheduled within months of her assumed-confirmation that will expose the inner-workings of corruption at the EPA that includes the retaliation against employees requesting reasonable accommodation and for whistle blowing.
Two EPA employees, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris, will be taking EPA back to court to expose its treatment of whistleblowers and its impact on public health and civil rights. Senior former and current officials within EPA, such as Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff, Rafael DeLeon, former Civil Rights and Human Resources Director, and Karen Higginbotham, former Civil Rights Director, along with three previous EPA Administrators, are either being brought out of retirement to be deposed or brought to trial for the two District Court cases that will break open the toxic level of wrongdoing and corruption in the Agency. The cases, scheduled for trial in the spring, show how EPA senior officials in key positions used their authority to go after employees who raise prohibited personnel practices. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo won a significant jury award in her case against EPA a decade ago that resulted in the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress. She returned to the agency only to have more retaliation occur and later was transferred to the office of Ray Spears, former Chief of Staff, reporting to Rafael DeLeon, a personal friend of Spears, who had just been removed from his position as the Director of Human Resources.
Depositions have started in both cases. Senior level EPA officials have been subpoenaed and information will be forthcoming that will shock the public and help explain why the Agency is unable to perform its mission to protect the health of the public. The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also involved in complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed by the former Assistant Director in the Office of Civil Rights, Susan Morris. Morris filed a whistle blowing complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, who wrote to former Administrator Lisa Jackson stating that their investigation uncovered that Morris was retaliated against for exposing the fact that Ms. Higginbotham refused to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for Congress.
###
No FEAR Coalition
Contact: 240-731-9577
Gina McCarthy: “EPA Employees Fight Corruption at the Agency - Will you Stand with Victims?
The new EPA Administrator will not only have to focus on climate change and the toxicity of our air and water, but also highly public trials that are scheduled within months of her assumed-confirmation that will expose the inner-workings of corruption at the EPA that includes the retaliation against employees requesting reasonable accommodation and for whistle blowing.
Two EPA employees, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris, will be taking EPA back to court to expose its treatment of whistleblowers and its impact on public health and civil rights. Senior former and current officials within EPA, such as Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff, Rafael DeLeon, former Civil Rights and Human Resources Director, and Karen Higginbotham, former Civil Rights Director, along with three previous EPA Administrators, are either being brought out of retirement to be deposed or brought to trial for the two District Court cases that will break open the toxic level of wrongdoing and corruption in the Agency. The cases, scheduled for trial in the spring, show how EPA senior officials in key positions used their authority to go after employees who raise prohibited personnel practices. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo won a significant jury award in her case against EPA a decade ago that resulted in the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress. She returned to the agency only to have more retaliation occur and later was transferred to the office of Ray Spears, former Chief of Staff, reporting to Rafael DeLeon, a personal friend of Spears, who had just been removed from his position as the Director of Human Resources.
Depositions have started in both cases. Senior level EPA officials have been subpoenaed and information will be forthcoming that will shock the public and help explain why the Agency is unable to perform its mission to protect the health of the public. The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also involved in complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed by the former Assistant Director in the Office of Civil Rights, Susan Morris. Morris filed a whistle blowing complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, who wrote to former Administrator Lisa Jackson stating that their investigation uncovered that Morris was retaliated against for exposing the fact that Ms. Higginbotham refused to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for Congress.
###
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH Report by EEOC March 18, 2013
Following is an email response to the EEOC Report on Obstacles in the Workforce for African Americans
Obstacle 7 (below) is key on accountability. Things we've been saying a long time. Unfortunately, when you read through this report you see that there are NO action items or discussions on doing anything about it. So it's just another blah, blah, blah report about something we already know. The EEOC continues to be ineffectual and part of the problem because the agency does not view itself as a part of the solution.
OBSTACLE 7 ISSUES :REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
*Awards, bonuses and promotions should be contingent on management's actions in EEO, and agencies should not grant proven discriminators awards, promotions,
outstanding performance evaluations, etc.
*Agency should consider demotion and/or removal of managerial duties of management officials who have been found to have engaged in unlawful discrimination or have adequately responded to harassment.
*The EEOC should seek legal authority to order punishment for responsible management officials.
*The EEOC should enter into a new agreement with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and explore ways to refer more cases in which agencies have failed to comply with our orders or if a violation warrants prosecution by OSC.
If you agree with this employee, C4C has a petition you can sign for disciplining discriminating officials: Join C4C by lifting our voices to hold public officials
accountable for breaking civil rights laws. Go to website below to sign petition:
https://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-sign-executive-order-mandate-discipline-for-public-officials-who-break-civil-rights-laws-2
Obstacle 7 (below) is key on accountability. Things we've been saying a long time. Unfortunately, when you read through this report you see that there are NO action items or discussions on doing anything about it. So it's just another blah, blah, blah report about something we already know. The EEOC continues to be ineffectual and part of the problem because the agency does not view itself as a part of the solution.
OBSTACLE 7 ISSUES :REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
*Awards, bonuses and promotions should be contingent on management's actions in EEO, and agencies should not grant proven discriminators awards, promotions,
outstanding performance evaluations, etc.
*Agency should consider demotion and/or removal of managerial duties of management officials who have been found to have engaged in unlawful discrimination or have adequately responded to harassment.
*The EEOC should seek legal authority to order punishment for responsible management officials.
*The EEOC should enter into a new agreement with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and explore ways to refer more cases in which agencies have failed to comply with our orders or if a violation warrants prosecution by OSC.
If you agree with this employee, C4C has a petition you can sign for disciplining discriminating officials: Join C4C by lifting our voices to hold public officials
accountable for breaking civil rights laws. Go to website below to sign petition:
https://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-sign-executive-order-mandate-discipline-for-public-officials-who-break-civil-rights-laws-2
New EEOC Report Examines Obstacles Facing March 15, 2013
African Americans in Federal Workplace
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
Seven Impediments, Underlying Issues, Recommendations Identified by Work Group
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today issued a comprehensive report addressing major obstacles hindering equal opportunities for African Americans in the federal work force, in addition to highlighting stakeholder recommendations. The report is available on EEOC's website at http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/reports/aawg.cfm.
The report, prepared by an internal agency work group, is based upon in-depth research and widespread consultations with key federal stakeholder groups
representing African Americans, as well as other affinity organizations (referred to in the report as "dialogue partners"). "This report is timely because it coincides with the Commission's recently approved Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2012-2016," said Carlton Hadden, director of EEOC's Office of Federal Operations. "This effort is the latest step in an ongoing dialogue with agency stakeholders to effectuate a model federal workplace for allemployees."
Following are the seven obstacles identified in the EEOC African American Workgroup Report:
- Unconscious biases and perceptions about African Americans still play a significant role in employment decisions in the federal sector.
- African Americans lack adequate mentoring and networking opportunities for higher-level and management positions.
- Insufficient training and development assignments perpetuate inequalities in skills and opportunities for African Americans.
- Narrow recruitment methods negatively impact African Americans.
- The perception of widespread inequality among African Americans in the federal work force hinders their career advancement.
- Educational requirements create obstacles for African Americans in the federal work force.
- EEO regulations and laws are not adequately followed by agencies and are not effectively enforced.
Each of the seven obstacles highlighted in the report contain background information, as well as underlying issues and specific recommendations from the work group's dialogue partners - who independently and repeatedly identified the aforementioned impediments. The report is being issued to memorialize the obstacles and recommendations of EEOC's dialogue partners. EEOC's dialogue partners in the report included: The work group also received valuable input from academic expert Dr. Paula Caplan of the W.E.B. Dubois Institute at Harvard University. The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination in the private and public sectors. Further information about the agency is available on its website at www.eeoc.gov.
Discipline for Public Officials who Break Civil Rights Laws March 15, 2013
Join C4C by lifting our voices to hold public officials accountable for breaking civil rights laws. Go to website below to sign petition:
https://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-sign-executive-order-mandate-discipline-for-public-officials-who-break-civil-rights-laws-2
https://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-sign-executive-order-mandate-discipline-for-public-officials-who-break-civil-rights-laws-2
EPA's Civil Rights Programs - Should be First on Agenda for new Administrator March 13, 2013
Karen Higginbotham was the EPA Office of Civil Rights (OCR) Director for almost a decade. During that time, the office failed to process complaints timely under Titles VI and VII. She also refused to approve and submit mandatory affirmative employment reports (EEOC MD-715) for FY 06, 07, and 08. (See Deloitte Report and Response). The Office of Special Counsel submitted a report to Administrator Jackson stating that Susan Morris, former Affirmative Employment & Diversity (AD&E) Assistant Director, was retaliated against by EPA for exposing Ms. Higginbotham's violations.
After Ms. Higginbotham was transferred to another position in the Administrator's Office, her mentor Ray Spears, the Deputy Chief of Staff, retired,and another friend of his, Rafael DeLeon, was slipped into the OCR Director's position. His appointment resulted in protests and marches against the agency, particularly by women. One march resulted in the entire Ariel Rios Building standing down while employees peered dout the windows at the hundreds of protesters. This did not seem to faze the Administrator/ EPA has had decades of problems in their OCR with another expensive report written by Holland & Knight after their lose in the jury trial of Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo. EPA's problems resulted in all Federal agencies being required to adhere to a new law, the No Fear Act of 2002. But, never mind all that because Administrator Jackson (a.k.a. Richard Windsor) was leaving for greener pastures in the Garden State of New Jersey, where she is rumored to be seeking public office. She left behind the mess in OCR for someone else to clean up, possibly Gina McCarthy.
The OCR employees, complainants and taxpayers suffer from these years of nonperformance and dysfunction at EPA. Instead of adhering to national policy to resolve or settle complaints at the lowest level in the process, EPA continues to force complainants out of the agency up to District Court. A number of employees are currently in the process of being deposed in three District Court cases, with more to come. The OCR is in shambles with numerous vacant positions as employees scramble to get out of the agency. Rafael DeLeon slid over to another position as a Deputy Director, the Deputy moved into the Director's office as Acting (she is an attorney that was also moved in), the Assistant Director for AD&E is retiring, the Black Employment Program position is vacant, the Asian American/Pacific Islander Program position is vacant, the American Indian/Alaska Native Program position is vacant since the incumbent is on detail, the Hispanic Employment Program Manager's position is vacant......and the list goes on and on. When will EPA put a Subject Matter Expert, such as Susan Morris, in the office to clean up their mess or do they prefer the attorneys at EPA running it? Let's hope the new Administrator makes the EPA OCR the first item on her agenda.
Shortly, we will be providing a review of the EPA Management Directive 715 Report for Fiscal Year 2011. The FY 12 MD-715 is in the process of being prepared by three employees who were left behind in AE&D.
After Ms. Higginbotham was transferred to another position in the Administrator's Office, her mentor Ray Spears, the Deputy Chief of Staff, retired,and another friend of his, Rafael DeLeon, was slipped into the OCR Director's position. His appointment resulted in protests and marches against the agency, particularly by women. One march resulted in the entire Ariel Rios Building standing down while employees peered dout the windows at the hundreds of protesters. This did not seem to faze the Administrator/ EPA has had decades of problems in their OCR with another expensive report written by Holland & Knight after their lose in the jury trial of Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo. EPA's problems resulted in all Federal agencies being required to adhere to a new law, the No Fear Act of 2002. But, never mind all that because Administrator Jackson (a.k.a. Richard Windsor) was leaving for greener pastures in the Garden State of New Jersey, where she is rumored to be seeking public office. She left behind the mess in OCR for someone else to clean up, possibly Gina McCarthy.
The OCR employees, complainants and taxpayers suffer from these years of nonperformance and dysfunction at EPA. Instead of adhering to national policy to resolve or settle complaints at the lowest level in the process, EPA continues to force complainants out of the agency up to District Court. A number of employees are currently in the process of being deposed in three District Court cases, with more to come. The OCR is in shambles with numerous vacant positions as employees scramble to get out of the agency. Rafael DeLeon slid over to another position as a Deputy Director, the Deputy moved into the Director's office as Acting (she is an attorney that was also moved in), the Assistant Director for AD&E is retiring, the Black Employment Program position is vacant, the Asian American/Pacific Islander Program position is vacant, the American Indian/Alaska Native Program position is vacant since the incumbent is on detail, the Hispanic Employment Program Manager's position is vacant......and the list goes on and on. When will EPA put a Subject Matter Expert, such as Susan Morris, in the office to clean up their mess or do they prefer the attorneys at EPA running it? Let's hope the new Administrator makes the EPA OCR the first item on her agenda.
Shortly, we will be providing a review of the EPA Management Directive 715 Report for Fiscal Year 2011. The FY 12 MD-715 is in the process of being prepared by three employees who were left behind in AE&D.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Gina McCarthy - ap photo
The No FEAR Coalition
Contact: 240-731-9577
March 5, 2013
Gina McCarthy: “EPA Employees Fight Corruption at the Agency –
Will you Stand with Us?
The new EPA Administrator will not only have to focus on climate change and the toxicity of our air and water, but also highly public trials that are scheduled within months of her assumed-confirmation that will expose the inner-workings of corruption at the EPA that includes the retaliation against employees requesting reasonable accommodation and for whistle blowing.
Two EPA employees, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris, will be taking EPA back to court to expose its treatment of whistleblowers and its impact on public health and civil rights. Senior former and current officials within EPA, such as Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff, Rafael DeLeon, former Civil Rights and Human Resources Director, and Karen Higginbotham, former Civil Rights Director, along with three previous EPA Administrators, are being l, either brought out of retirement to be deposed or brought to trial for the two District Court cases that will break open the toxic level of wrongdoing and corruption in the Agency.
The cases, scheduled for trial in the spring, show how EPA senior officials in key positions use their authority to go after employees who raise prohibited personnel
practices.Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo won a significant jury award in her case against EPA a decade ago that resulted in the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress.She returned to the agency only to have more retaliation occur and later was transferred to the office of Ray Spears, former Chief of Staff, reporting to Rafael DeLeon, a personal friend of Spears, who had just been removed from his position as the Director of Human Resources.
The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also involved in complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed by the former Assistant Director in the Office of Civil
Rights, Susan Morris. Morris filed a whistle blowing complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, who wrote to former Administrator Lisa Jasckon stating that their investigation uncovered that Morris was retaliated against for exposing the fact that Ms. Higginbotham refused to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for Congress. OSC recommended that Ms. Morris be returned to EPA and her position in Civil Rights, with all benefits that would have accrued had she not been retaliated against.EPA defied the ruling by EEOC thereby showing complete disdain for that organization.
#####
Posted: March 7, 2013
Dear Colleagues: It is an honor for me to share with you the President’s remarks in nominating as the next Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, our colleague, Gina McCarthy, the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation. Gina and I have worked together at both the state level and federal level, and I
very much look forward to our continued partnership. Bob Perciasepe Acting Administrator
Remarks by the President in Personnel Announcements East Room
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. This afternoon, I’ll hold my first Cabinet meeting of my second term. And there will be some new faces, and there will be
some familiar faces in new jobs. But there will also be some seats waiting to be filled on a permanent basis. And today, I’m announcing my plan to nominate three
outstanding individuals to help us tackle some of our most important challenges.
One of those challenges is building on the work that we've done to control our own energy future while reducing pollution that contributes to climate change. And
few people have played more of a role in addressing these issues than current Secretary of Energy Steven Chu. Steven has helped us to speed the transition to
more sustainable sources of energy. He’s given more of our brightest young scientists the opportunity to pursue the ideas that will shape our future. So I could not be more grateful to Steve for the incredible contribution that he’s made to this country.
And now that he’s decided to leave Washington for sunny California, I’m proud to nominate another brilliant scientist to take his place -- Mr. Ernie Moniz. There’s Ernie right there. Now, the good news is that Ernie already knows his way around the Department of Energy. He is a physicist by training, but he also served as Under Secretary of Energy under President Clinton. Since then, he’s directed MIT’s Energy Initiative, which brings together prominent thinkers and energy companies to develop the technologies that can lead us to more energy independence and also to new jobs. Most importantly, Ernie knows that we can produce more energy and grow our economy while still taking care of our air, our water and our climate. And so I could not be more pleased to have Ernie join us. And he will be joined in that effort by my nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
Over the last four years, Lisa Jackson and her team at the EPA have helped us to reduce emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that causes climate change,
put in place the toughest new pollution standards in two decades. Lisa is now ready for a well-deserved break. And I want to very much thank Bob Perciasepe, who’s not only been a great Deputy Administrator, but has also been acting as the Acting Administrator. So, please, Bob -- everybody give Bob a big round of applause. As we move forward, I think there is nobody who can do a better job in filling Lisa’s shoes permanently than my nominee who’s standing beside me here -- Gina McCarthy. Now, you wouldn't know from talking to her, but Gina is from Boston. And one of her proudest moments was yelling “Play ball!” at Fenway Park before a Red Sox game. But Gina has got plenty more to be proud of. As a top environmental official in Massachusetts and Connecticut, she helped design programs to expand energy efficiency and promote renewable energy. As Assistant EPA Administrator, Gina has focused on practical, cost-effective ways to keep our air clean and our economy growing. She’s earned a reputation as a straight shooter. She welcomes different points of views. I’m confident that she’s going to do an outstanding job leading the EPA.
So these two over here, they're going to be making sure that we're investing in American energy, that we're doing everything that we can to combat the threat of climate change that we're going to be creating jobs and economic opportunity in the first place. They are going to be a great team. And these are some of my top priorities going forward. But as President, one of the things you learn very quickly is that it's not enough just to talk a big game; the real test is whether your priorities are reflected in a budget. And that’s where the rubber hits the road. That’s where my third nominee comes in.
Since I took office, Jeff Zients has served as America’s first Chief Performance Officer and the Deputy Director of the management -- Director for Management of the Office of Management and Budget. He's made our government more efficient. He's saved taxpayers a lot of money. He’s stepped in as Acting Director of OMB not once, but twice, including leading up to the fiscal cliff. So there’s no question that Jeff’s skill and versatility have served the American people very well. I expect it will continue to serve us well in the future.
In the meantime, I am confident that my nominee for OMB Director, Sylvia Mathews Burwell, is the right person to continue Jeff's great work. In the 1990s, when
she was, what, 19 -- (laughter) -- Sylvia served under Jack Lew as Deputy Director of OMB --part of a team that presided over three budget surpluses in a row. Later, she helped the Gates Foundation grow into a global force for good, and then she helped the Walmart Foundation expand its charitable work. So Sylvia knows her way around a budget. But as the granddaughter of Greek immigrants, she also understands that our goal when we put together a budget is not just to make the numbers add up. Our goal is also to reignite the true engine of economic growth in this country, and that is a strong and growing middle class -- to offer ladders of opportunity for anybody willing to climb them. Sylvia's mom is here. And Sylvia loves to talk about her parents growing up in West Virginia and the values that they instilled in her as educators. And I think that reflects everything that Sylvia now does. And so I'm absolutely confident that she's going to do a great job at OMB. And those values are especially important to remember now, as we continue to try and find a way forward in light of the budget cuts that are already starting to cost us jobs and hurt our economy.
As I said before, the American people are resilient. And I know that Jeff and Sylvia will do everything in their power to blunt the impact of these cuts on businesses and middle-class families. But eventually, a lot of people are going to feel some pain. That’s why we've got to keep on working to reduce our deficit in a balanced way -- an approach that's supported by the majority of the American people, including a majority of Republicans. And I'm confident that we can get there if people of goodwill come together. So I want to thank Steve and Lisa and Jeff once more for their outstanding service, for all the great work that they’ve done in this administration over the last several years. I want to thank Ernie, Gina and Sylvia, and their families, for agreeing to take on these big roles.
I hope the Senate will confirm them as soon as possible, because we’ve got a lot of work to do and we cannot afford delay. But I can promise you that as soon as
the Senate gives them the go ahead, they're going to hit the ground running and they're going to help make America a stronger and more prosperous country.
So thank you very much, everybody.
Dear Colleagues: It is an honor for me to share with you the President’s remarks in nominating as the next Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, our colleague, Gina McCarthy, the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation. Gina and I have worked together at both the state level and federal level, and I
very much look forward to our continued partnership. Bob Perciasepe Acting Administrator
Remarks by the President in Personnel Announcements East Room
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. This afternoon, I’ll hold my first Cabinet meeting of my second term. And there will be some new faces, and there will be
some familiar faces in new jobs. But there will also be some seats waiting to be filled on a permanent basis. And today, I’m announcing my plan to nominate three
outstanding individuals to help us tackle some of our most important challenges.
One of those challenges is building on the work that we've done to control our own energy future while reducing pollution that contributes to climate change. And
few people have played more of a role in addressing these issues than current Secretary of Energy Steven Chu. Steven has helped us to speed the transition to
more sustainable sources of energy. He’s given more of our brightest young scientists the opportunity to pursue the ideas that will shape our future. So I could not be more grateful to Steve for the incredible contribution that he’s made to this country.
And now that he’s decided to leave Washington for sunny California, I’m proud to nominate another brilliant scientist to take his place -- Mr. Ernie Moniz. There’s Ernie right there. Now, the good news is that Ernie already knows his way around the Department of Energy. He is a physicist by training, but he also served as Under Secretary of Energy under President Clinton. Since then, he’s directed MIT’s Energy Initiative, which brings together prominent thinkers and energy companies to develop the technologies that can lead us to more energy independence and also to new jobs. Most importantly, Ernie knows that we can produce more energy and grow our economy while still taking care of our air, our water and our climate. And so I could not be more pleased to have Ernie join us. And he will be joined in that effort by my nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
Over the last four years, Lisa Jackson and her team at the EPA have helped us to reduce emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that causes climate change,
put in place the toughest new pollution standards in two decades. Lisa is now ready for a well-deserved break. And I want to very much thank Bob Perciasepe, who’s not only been a great Deputy Administrator, but has also been acting as the Acting Administrator. So, please, Bob -- everybody give Bob a big round of applause. As we move forward, I think there is nobody who can do a better job in filling Lisa’s shoes permanently than my nominee who’s standing beside me here -- Gina McCarthy. Now, you wouldn't know from talking to her, but Gina is from Boston. And one of her proudest moments was yelling “Play ball!” at Fenway Park before a Red Sox game. But Gina has got plenty more to be proud of. As a top environmental official in Massachusetts and Connecticut, she helped design programs to expand energy efficiency and promote renewable energy. As Assistant EPA Administrator, Gina has focused on practical, cost-effective ways to keep our air clean and our economy growing. She’s earned a reputation as a straight shooter. She welcomes different points of views. I’m confident that she’s going to do an outstanding job leading the EPA.
So these two over here, they're going to be making sure that we're investing in American energy, that we're doing everything that we can to combat the threat of climate change that we're going to be creating jobs and economic opportunity in the first place. They are going to be a great team. And these are some of my top priorities going forward. But as President, one of the things you learn very quickly is that it's not enough just to talk a big game; the real test is whether your priorities are reflected in a budget. And that’s where the rubber hits the road. That’s where my third nominee comes in.
Since I took office, Jeff Zients has served as America’s first Chief Performance Officer and the Deputy Director of the management -- Director for Management of the Office of Management and Budget. He's made our government more efficient. He's saved taxpayers a lot of money. He’s stepped in as Acting Director of OMB not once, but twice, including leading up to the fiscal cliff. So there’s no question that Jeff’s skill and versatility have served the American people very well. I expect it will continue to serve us well in the future.
In the meantime, I am confident that my nominee for OMB Director, Sylvia Mathews Burwell, is the right person to continue Jeff's great work. In the 1990s, when
she was, what, 19 -- (laughter) -- Sylvia served under Jack Lew as Deputy Director of OMB --part of a team that presided over three budget surpluses in a row. Later, she helped the Gates Foundation grow into a global force for good, and then she helped the Walmart Foundation expand its charitable work. So Sylvia knows her way around a budget. But as the granddaughter of Greek immigrants, she also understands that our goal when we put together a budget is not just to make the numbers add up. Our goal is also to reignite the true engine of economic growth in this country, and that is a strong and growing middle class -- to offer ladders of opportunity for anybody willing to climb them. Sylvia's mom is here. And Sylvia loves to talk about her parents growing up in West Virginia and the values that they instilled in her as educators. And I think that reflects everything that Sylvia now does. And so I'm absolutely confident that she's going to do a great job at OMB. And those values are especially important to remember now, as we continue to try and find a way forward in light of the budget cuts that are already starting to cost us jobs and hurt our economy.
As I said before, the American people are resilient. And I know that Jeff and Sylvia will do everything in their power to blunt the impact of these cuts on businesses and middle-class families. But eventually, a lot of people are going to feel some pain. That’s why we've got to keep on working to reduce our deficit in a balanced way -- an approach that's supported by the majority of the American people, including a majority of Republicans. And I'm confident that we can get there if people of goodwill come together. So I want to thank Steve and Lisa and Jeff once more for their outstanding service, for all the great work that they’ve done in this administration over the last several years. I want to thank Ernie, Gina and Sylvia, and their families, for agreeing to take on these big roles.
I hope the Senate will confirm them as soon as possible, because we’ve got a lot of work to do and we cannot afford delay. But I can promise you that as soon as
the Senate gives them the go ahead, they're going to hit the ground running and they're going to help make America a stronger and more prosperous country.
So thank you very much, everybody.
Depositions in Cases Against EPA March 3, 2013
Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff, is being brought out of retirement to be deposed in two cases that are winding their way into District Court. Spears, who retired from EPA following the removal of the former EPA Office of Civil Rights (OCR) Director, Karen Higginbotham, is being deposed because of his involvement in and allegations of discrimination and retaliation charged by two former senior female employees, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris, in which they named Spears, Karen Higginbotham and Rafael DeLeon as responsible management officials.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo previously won a jury verdict against EPA over a decade ago for retaliation, after which Congress passed the 2002 No Fear Act, which she covered in her recent and timely book, "No Fear, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA." She returned to the agency after the jury verdict, only to later find herself reporting to Ray Spears as her second-line supervisor and Rafael DeLeon, a personal friend of Spears, as her first-line supervisor. Actions she is alleging were taken against her also included the involvement of Ms. Higginbotham and Bill Haig in OCR. The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also named by Susan Morris, former Assistant Director, Affirmative Employment & Diversity, in her complaints of discrimination and retaliation against the EPA. In September 2012, the Office of Special Counsel notified former Administrator Lisa Jackson that Morris had been retaliated against for whistleblowing when the agency failed to carry out civil rights laws and regulations. OSC recommended that Morris be returned to EPA and her position with other appropriate relief, yet the EPA refused. The position she occupied is currently being announced as the current occupant retires.
It appears that the EPA OCR has been continuously in the state of chaos over for decades. A scathing report by Holland & Knight consultants on the mismanagement in that office was repeated 13 years later with a report issued by Deloitte consulting outlining the years of nonperformance under the leadership of Ms. Higginbotham showing that internal employee and external environmental complaints were either not processed or processed untimely and mandatory reports were not submitted. After Higginbotham's removal from the position, women protested Administrator Jackson's appointment of Rafael DeLeon into the vacant position in spite of known problems he has had in the past. DeLeon recently transferred to another organization as a Deputy Director, so that his Deputy, another attorney has taken over the OCR in an acting capacity. EPA has a long history of transferring employees into civil rights who have little or no background in the field in order to manage and lead an effective civil rights program.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo previously won a jury verdict against EPA over a decade ago for retaliation, after which Congress passed the 2002 No Fear Act, which she covered in her recent and timely book, "No Fear, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA." She returned to the agency after the jury verdict, only to later find herself reporting to Ray Spears as her second-line supervisor and Rafael DeLeon, a personal friend of Spears, as her first-line supervisor. Actions she is alleging were taken against her also included the involvement of Ms. Higginbotham and Bill Haig in OCR. The trio (Spears, DeLeon and Higginbotham) were also named by Susan Morris, former Assistant Director, Affirmative Employment & Diversity, in her complaints of discrimination and retaliation against the EPA. In September 2012, the Office of Special Counsel notified former Administrator Lisa Jackson that Morris had been retaliated against for whistleblowing when the agency failed to carry out civil rights laws and regulations. OSC recommended that Morris be returned to EPA and her position with other appropriate relief, yet the EPA refused. The position she occupied is currently being announced as the current occupant retires.
It appears that the EPA OCR has been continuously in the state of chaos over for decades. A scathing report by Holland & Knight consultants on the mismanagement in that office was repeated 13 years later with a report issued by Deloitte consulting outlining the years of nonperformance under the leadership of Ms. Higginbotham showing that internal employee and external environmental complaints were either not processed or processed untimely and mandatory reports were not submitted. After Higginbotham's removal from the position, women protested Administrator Jackson's appointment of Rafael DeLeon into the vacant position in spite of known problems he has had in the past. DeLeon recently transferred to another organization as a Deputy Director, so that his Deputy, another attorney has taken over the OCR in an acting capacity. EPA has a long history of transferring employees into civil rights who have little or no background in the field in order to manage and lead an effective civil rights program.
Bob Perciasepe - Deer in the Headlights
Deer in the Headlights
Bill Huston's Blog (Binghamton NY)
Friday December 28, 2012
EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe was at Cornell 4-10-12. The NYTimes is saying he will take over EPA now that Lisa Jackson has resigned, at least in the interim
BH asks Bob Perciasepe, EPA Deputy Admin, about Dimock's water, April 2012. Youtube.com/watch?v=vUhcp0VZW4U
As you can see, he refused to acknowledge that any problems exist in Dimock, or elsewhere in PA, he thought that "setting tough standards" was EPA's primary function. When I asked him about enforcement actions, he got that "deer-in-the-headlights" look.
Friday December 28, 2012
EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe was at Cornell 4-10-12. The NYTimes is saying he will take over EPA now that Lisa Jackson has resigned, at least in the interim
BH asks Bob Perciasepe, EPA Deputy Admin, about Dimock's water, April 2012. Youtube.com/watch?v=vUhcp0VZW4U
As you can see, he refused to acknowledge that any problems exist in Dimock, or elsewhere in PA, he thought that "setting tough standards" was EPA's primary function. When I asked him about enforcement actions, he got that "deer-in-the-headlights" look.
USDA AND THE POWERS TO BE CAN'T SILENCE THE TRUTH. February 8, 2013
Click here: Mediacenter | CBS42.com Video on Black Farmers Protesting
No Fear Act Violations Throughout Government January 29, 2013
Following is an article written by Evelynn Brown on the extensive work done to expose the violations of the law that was passed a decade ago to bring more accountability to the federal government and managers for complaints of discrimination. retaliation and harassment. Among other things, the 2002 No Fear Act made agencies responsible for paying for complaints out of their own budgets rather than a central slush fund, increased accountability for findings against managers, and increased reporting requirements on the costs and penalties for discriminating and retaliation against employees. No Fear reporting requirements included posting information on agency websites, along with preparing and submitting an annual report for Congress.
Most agencies simply posted data from their Management Directive 715 (MD-715) Reports required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, submitted their MD-715 Reports annually, and failed to prepare and submit the mandatory reports to Congress. The following article by Evelynn Brown exposes the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) failure to comply with the law, but we are aware of many more such violations throughout the government.
We have reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was found guilty of not even submitting the standard MD-715 Reports to EEOC for three years (2006, 2007, and 2008), with the 2009 report hand-delivered to make it timely. There is no question that EPA has violated the civil rights laws for years, continues to use the civil rights office as a dumping ground for inexperienced employees, and retaliated against the subject matter expert who exposed their violations of law.
We applaud the work of Whistlewatch in their pursuit of bringing these violations to the attention of the Office of Special Counsel and all of us. The OSC letter to Ms. Brown is at the Whistlewatch site and will be added later.
Most agencies simply posted data from their Management Directive 715 (MD-715) Reports required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, submitted their MD-715 Reports annually, and failed to prepare and submit the mandatory reports to Congress. The following article by Evelynn Brown exposes the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) failure to comply with the law, but we are aware of many more such violations throughout the government.
We have reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was found guilty of not even submitting the standard MD-715 Reports to EEOC for three years (2006, 2007, and 2008), with the 2009 report hand-delivered to make it timely. There is no question that EPA has violated the civil rights laws for years, continues to use the civil rights office as a dumping ground for inexperienced employees, and retaliated against the subject matter expert who exposed their violations of law.
We applaud the work of Whistlewatch in their pursuit of bringing these violations to the attention of the Office of Special Counsel and all of us. The OSC letter to Ms. Brown is at the Whistlewatch site and will be added later.
Whistlewatch uncovers No Fear Act Violation at HHS January 29, 2013
Office of Special Counsel Issues Former HHS Employee Referral Letter Showing Dept of Health and Human Services Repeatedly Violated No Fear Act
19:47, January 29, 2013 by Evelynn Brown, J.D., LL.M under: Ethics, False Claims Act, Federal Employees, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Government, Resources, Scholarly Publications and Collegue Sharing, Whistleblower Rewards | Discuss
This is a follow up to the story Whistlewatch.org did on our extensive Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to cabinet level agencies on compliance with a federal law that protects employees from discrimination and whistleblower retaliation. More can be found http://whistlewatch.org.
In response to the information gathered by Whistlewatch.org concerning the No Fear Act, I personally made a disclosure to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) in 2012, that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had violated the law when it was found that the federal agency had not filed any reports to Congress for the past 10 years. OSC has jurisdiction to accept this disclosure since I was a federal employee at HHS and a federal whistleblower.
Why is this important to federal service workers and the general public? Because HHS is the provider of health care and the guardian of health care for all citizens. The agency will provide all oversight in new health care laws under the Affordable Care Act.
If HHS cannot be trusted to obey the laws of the No Fear Act, which protects their own employees, I doubt their management will obey any new health care law and/or have the best interest of helping to enforce protections. When the head of the fish is dead, the whole fish stinks!
HHS is violating the No Fear Act with immunity and no single entity including Congress or the EEOC or the DOJ is holding any official including Secretary Kathleen Sebelius accountable. Secretary Sebelius this has happened on your watch. Now we are watching you and your performance to protect federal employees who protect the public’s health care programs.
Further, HHS and all federal agencies are spending billions of tax payer dollars for useless training on the No Fear Act with litigation mounting. A complete and utter waste of tax payer money if the law is never enforced. If HHS is flagrantly ignoring the legal requirements of filing annual reports, what is to say they will file any legally mandated reports on health care violations by employers. That means your health care protections are at risk subject to the whim of federal management who are directly connected to big, medium and small corporations and companies, nationwide.
The employees of federal agencies are entitled to the protections signed into law in 2002. Those protections are clearly not being provided as demonstrated by the need to enhance the Whistleblower Protection Act. The No Fear Act is not a shiny ball hanging on a justice tree like so many pieces of tinsel that are little more than decorations that state they will protect employees but when push comes to shove, then leave whistleblowers and those subject to gross violations of discrimination law to fund their own legal defense while agencies use tax payer money to further harm government employees.
The No Fear Act is a federal law. It must be obeyed by federal agencies. This public law must be enforced to protect those who protect the public. Without enforcement protections, we all are at enormous health care risks.
My sincere thanks to the OSC and my colleagues who helped on this task. Keep up the good work!
19:47, January 29, 2013 by Evelynn Brown, J.D., LL.M under: Ethics, False Claims Act, Federal Employees, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Government, Resources, Scholarly Publications and Collegue Sharing, Whistleblower Rewards | Discuss
This is a follow up to the story Whistlewatch.org did on our extensive Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to cabinet level agencies on compliance with a federal law that protects employees from discrimination and whistleblower retaliation. More can be found http://whistlewatch.org.
In response to the information gathered by Whistlewatch.org concerning the No Fear Act, I personally made a disclosure to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) in 2012, that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had violated the law when it was found that the federal agency had not filed any reports to Congress for the past 10 years. OSC has jurisdiction to accept this disclosure since I was a federal employee at HHS and a federal whistleblower.
Why is this important to federal service workers and the general public? Because HHS is the provider of health care and the guardian of health care for all citizens. The agency will provide all oversight in new health care laws under the Affordable Care Act.
If HHS cannot be trusted to obey the laws of the No Fear Act, which protects their own employees, I doubt their management will obey any new health care law and/or have the best interest of helping to enforce protections. When the head of the fish is dead, the whole fish stinks!
HHS is violating the No Fear Act with immunity and no single entity including Congress or the EEOC or the DOJ is holding any official including Secretary Kathleen Sebelius accountable. Secretary Sebelius this has happened on your watch. Now we are watching you and your performance to protect federal employees who protect the public’s health care programs.
Further, HHS and all federal agencies are spending billions of tax payer dollars for useless training on the No Fear Act with litigation mounting. A complete and utter waste of tax payer money if the law is never enforced. If HHS is flagrantly ignoring the legal requirements of filing annual reports, what is to say they will file any legally mandated reports on health care violations by employers. That means your health care protections are at risk subject to the whim of federal management who are directly connected to big, medium and small corporations and companies, nationwide.
The employees of federal agencies are entitled to the protections signed into law in 2002. Those protections are clearly not being provided as demonstrated by the need to enhance the Whistleblower Protection Act. The No Fear Act is not a shiny ball hanging on a justice tree like so many pieces of tinsel that are little more than decorations that state they will protect employees but when push comes to shove, then leave whistleblowers and those subject to gross violations of discrimination law to fund their own legal defense while agencies use tax payer money to further harm government employees.
The No Fear Act is a federal law. It must be obeyed by federal agencies. This public law must be enforced to protect those who protect the public. Without enforcement protections, we all are at enormous health care risks.
My sincere thanks to the OSC and my colleagues who helped on this task. Keep up the good work!
Richard Windsor to be MLK Program Keynote Speaker January 28, 2013
The annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Birthday Celebration program sponsored by the Office of Civil Rights at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been touted as one of the largest and best throughout the Federal Triangle for almost a decade. After every program, federal employees and the general public who packed the Amphitheater in the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C. said that they didn't think the program could be better than the previous year, yet year after year the Affirmative Employment & Diversity staff in the Office of Civil Rights exceeded expectations by bringing in some of the most outstanding speakers and musical talent.
"As with other things, these programs looked as if they were easy to put together because they were usually flawless and fabulous, but that was only because of the exceptional work of my small, competent, and effective AE&D staff," said Susan Morris, former OCR Assistant Director responsible for planning and implementing the programs. "These are civil rights programs because they are targeted to protected groups that only include African Americans, Asians/Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, American Indians, People with Disabilities, and Women. The affirmative employment programs do not extend to other groups in the workforce. EPA also has programs for the gay and lesbian community and older workers, but these are diversity related. Management often confuses affirmative employment and diversity programs, which they have done at EPA," she explained. "Unfortunately, as time goes on these programs becomes distorted because of the lack of expertise. Inexperienced managers will decide to do a 1-week catch-all program or use funds outside civil rights to put these programs on when it actually opens the door for complaints from other ethnic groups and has been known to increase complaints," she said. "The authority for these programs resides in civil rights, not personnel or a newly-created diversity office."
When asked her opinion on Administrator Lisa Jackson, a.k.a Richard Windsor, being this year's keynote speaker for the Martin Luther King program at EPA, Morris said, "I've been in Washington, D.C. long enough to say 'no comment', but it does appear that everyone is getting ready for future elections, here and throughout the country." With over 30 years of exceptional performance in the federal government and industry, the Office of Special Counsel found that Morris was retaliated against for reporting that EPA failed to submit mandatory annual affirmative employment reports prepared for Congress for almost four years. Subsequently, the OCR Director, Karen Higginbotham, was transferred out of the OCR Director's position and others either retired, left or were forced out.
This year's Martin Luther King, Jr. program is being sponsored by the Office of Administration and Resources Management (Diversity Office), with the Office of Civil Rights listed second as a sponsor, followed by two external non-labor employee groups, the African American Male Forum and Older Workers League.
"As with other things, these programs looked as if they were easy to put together because they were usually flawless and fabulous, but that was only because of the exceptional work of my small, competent, and effective AE&D staff," said Susan Morris, former OCR Assistant Director responsible for planning and implementing the programs. "These are civil rights programs because they are targeted to protected groups that only include African Americans, Asians/Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, American Indians, People with Disabilities, and Women. The affirmative employment programs do not extend to other groups in the workforce. EPA also has programs for the gay and lesbian community and older workers, but these are diversity related. Management often confuses affirmative employment and diversity programs, which they have done at EPA," she explained. "Unfortunately, as time goes on these programs becomes distorted because of the lack of expertise. Inexperienced managers will decide to do a 1-week catch-all program or use funds outside civil rights to put these programs on when it actually opens the door for complaints from other ethnic groups and has been known to increase complaints," she said. "The authority for these programs resides in civil rights, not personnel or a newly-created diversity office."
When asked her opinion on Administrator Lisa Jackson, a.k.a Richard Windsor, being this year's keynote speaker for the Martin Luther King program at EPA, Morris said, "I've been in Washington, D.C. long enough to say 'no comment', but it does appear that everyone is getting ready for future elections, here and throughout the country." With over 30 years of exceptional performance in the federal government and industry, the Office of Special Counsel found that Morris was retaliated against for reporting that EPA failed to submit mandatory annual affirmative employment reports prepared for Congress for almost four years. Subsequently, the OCR Director, Karen Higginbotham, was transferred out of the OCR Director's position and others either retired, left or were forced out.
This year's Martin Luther King, Jr. program is being sponsored by the Office of Administration and Resources Management (Diversity Office), with the Office of Civil Rights listed second as a sponsor, followed by two external non-labor employee groups, the African American Male Forum and Older Workers League.
Mississippi Workshop On Women And Hispanic Lawsuit Against USDA January 28, 2013
For Immediate Release: January 28, 2013
Contacts: John Zippert, Director of Program Operations
johnzippert@federation.coop * (205) 652-9676
Mircha King, Federation Lawsuit Coordinator
mirchaking@federation.coop * 800-503-5678
Workshop Is For Mississippi And Alabama Potential Claimants - Saturday, February 2, 2013 in Shuqualak from 10:00AM - 3:00PM
ATLANTA...The Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund will host a workshop on Saturday, February 2, 2013 at 10AM in Shuqualak, Mississippi to explain the qualifications claimants have to meet to participate in the Women and Hispanic Discrimination lawsuit against the USDA, which is now in the late stages of the claim process. The workshop is offered for potential claimants in Mississippi and Alabama. The claims process for this lawsuit ends on March 25, 2013, which gives potential claimants less than 90 days to file.
On Saturday, February 2, 2013 the Federation will host an informational workshop on the lawsuit at the following location in Mississippi for Mississippi and Alabama claimants:
Women and Hispanic Lawsuit Workshop, Shuqualak Community Center, 106 Floyd Loop, Shuqualak, MS 39361, From 10:00AM -3:00PM
The workshop will explain who qualifies for the lawsuit and what requirements must be met in order to submit a claim form and receive a cash award. "Our intent is to provide as much detailed information as possible to assist women farmers with the claims process," said John Zippert with the Federation of Southern Cooperatives. One of the requirements to participate in this lawsuit is that Women and Hispanic farmers had to have experienced USDA discrimination between the years of 1981-1996, or October 13, 1998-October 13, 2000.
There will be additional information offered at the workshop about the claims process and the claim form itself. Women and Hispanic farmers are encouraged to attend
this informational session and learn the facts concerning the women's discrimination lawsuit against the USDA on February 2, 2013.
Contacts: John Zippert, Director of Program Operations
johnzippert@federation.coop * (205) 652-9676
Mircha King, Federation Lawsuit Coordinator
mirchaking@federation.coop * 800-503-5678
Workshop Is For Mississippi And Alabama Potential Claimants - Saturday, February 2, 2013 in Shuqualak from 10:00AM - 3:00PM
ATLANTA...The Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund will host a workshop on Saturday, February 2, 2013 at 10AM in Shuqualak, Mississippi to explain the qualifications claimants have to meet to participate in the Women and Hispanic Discrimination lawsuit against the USDA, which is now in the late stages of the claim process. The workshop is offered for potential claimants in Mississippi and Alabama. The claims process for this lawsuit ends on March 25, 2013, which gives potential claimants less than 90 days to file.
On Saturday, February 2, 2013 the Federation will host an informational workshop on the lawsuit at the following location in Mississippi for Mississippi and Alabama claimants:
Women and Hispanic Lawsuit Workshop, Shuqualak Community Center, 106 Floyd Loop, Shuqualak, MS 39361, From 10:00AM -3:00PM
The workshop will explain who qualifies for the lawsuit and what requirements must be met in order to submit a claim form and receive a cash award. "Our intent is to provide as much detailed information as possible to assist women farmers with the claims process," said John Zippert with the Federation of Southern Cooperatives. One of the requirements to participate in this lawsuit is that Women and Hispanic farmers had to have experienced USDA discrimination between the years of 1981-1996, or October 13, 1998-October 13, 2000.
There will be additional information offered at the workshop about the claims process and the claim form itself. Women and Hispanic farmers are encouraged to attend
this informational session and learn the facts concerning the women's discrimination lawsuit against the USDA on February 2, 2013.
EPA Needs Some Fresh Air January 18, 2013
Shuttle 22 of EPA Insiders
Hopefully, in the new year, the Obama administration will appoint someone from the outside of EPA so that the culture and environment within the agency will change for the better. Some senior staff members have become entrenched over the years and just shuttled around to various locations and offices. For example, Karen Higginbotham, the former Director of Civil Rights started out in Contracting, was transferred to civil rights, promoted to the Director by the former Chief of Staff, transferred out (see Deloitte Report and failure to submit reports), and transferred again to handle work for SES members. Any loss in grade, pay or awards? Her replacement Rafael DeLeon started in the civil rights years ago and shuttled around for years as he was allowed to create the law office for civil rights work, became the Director of Human Resources, creating a section similar to that in civil rights, after an investigation moved out of the building and office, placed in another SES position reporting to the former Deputy Chief of Staff, Ray Spears, then back into civil rights to become the Director, back out again, as a Deputy in another office. Any loss in grade, pay or awards? And the list goes on and on.........
The now former Administrators Lisa Jackson and Stephen Johnson were civilians in EPA before being appointed to the top job. Unfortunately, insiders tend to keep things the same and if any agency needs some fresh air, it's EPA. During Jackson's tenure, civil rights was in chaos with marches and protests; allegations of a "War on Women"; complaints filed on prohibited personnel practices and discrimination; Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation for whistleblowing; and much more -- and out they went onto supposedly bigger and better things leaving behind all the problems. Administrator Jackson cleaned out her office and her Deputy, Bob Perciasepe, is now in charge of EPA, while various people are considered, including:
Bob Perciasepe, Deputy EPA Administrator with years of experience in EPA, where he ran the air and water programs two separate times under the Clinton administration. He is not expected to get too much opposition from industry.
Mary Nichols, another Clinton administration consideration, who heads the California Air Resources Board. Said to be more aggressive on environmental issues.
Gina McCarthy, another EPA insider in charge of air and radiation, who is a regular for appearing before Congress at hearings.
Daniel Esty, a commissioner with the Connecticut Department of Energy and the Environment, who worked with the governor to develop alternative and clean energy technologies.
Kathleen McGinty, another Clinton advisor and the former secretary of Pennsylvania's Department of the Environment, who was previously considered when Lisa Jackson was selected instead from New Jersey. She has been praised for her positions on clean air and advising on environmental issues.
Hopefully, the appointee will have the strength and leadership to make a significant change inside EPA - it needs it!
The now former Administrators Lisa Jackson and Stephen Johnson were civilians in EPA before being appointed to the top job. Unfortunately, insiders tend to keep things the same and if any agency needs some fresh air, it's EPA. During Jackson's tenure, civil rights was in chaos with marches and protests; allegations of a "War on Women"; complaints filed on prohibited personnel practices and discrimination; Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation for whistleblowing; and much more -- and out they went onto supposedly bigger and better things leaving behind all the problems. Administrator Jackson cleaned out her office and her Deputy, Bob Perciasepe, is now in charge of EPA, while various people are considered, including:
Bob Perciasepe, Deputy EPA Administrator with years of experience in EPA, where he ran the air and water programs two separate times under the Clinton administration. He is not expected to get too much opposition from industry.
Mary Nichols, another Clinton administration consideration, who heads the California Air Resources Board. Said to be more aggressive on environmental issues.
Gina McCarthy, another EPA insider in charge of air and radiation, who is a regular for appearing before Congress at hearings.
Daniel Esty, a commissioner with the Connecticut Department of Energy and the Environment, who worked with the governor to develop alternative and clean energy technologies.
Kathleen McGinty, another Clinton advisor and the former secretary of Pennsylvania's Department of the Environment, who was previously considered when Lisa Jackson was selected instead from New Jersey. She has been praised for her positions on clean air and advising on environmental issues.
Hopefully, the appointee will have the strength and leadership to make a significant change inside EPA - it needs it!
Except from Lisa Jackson's Farewell January 2013
Dear Colleagues:
Four years ago this month, then President-elect Barack Obama nominated me to be the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, where 21 years earlier I had begun my career in public service as an environmental engineer in the Superfund program. Who says you can’t go home again?
It was a poignant homecoming, and it has been an extraordinary honor to be the champion of the EPA’s dedicated women and men and our vital mission to protect human health and the environment in communities across our great nation. I have witnessed your resolve to make things better for the American people, felt the passion that compels you to go above and beyond for communities in need and marveled at the grace with which you serve the public. So it is both easy and difficult to tell you, my colleagues, that I will be leaving the EPA shortly after the President’s State of the Union address.
As I wrote you earlier this month, we have accomplished so much in the past four years, and I hope you share my pride in our achievements. Because of the work we have done, the air American families breathe, the water they drink and the land on which they live, work and play will be cleaner and healthier for decades to come.
I am grateful to be able to leave the Agency to pursue new challenges with a sense of pride in what we have accomplished and, most of all, with the firm knowledge that you will build upon our achievements in the years to come. I am confident that the EPA’s 50th anniversary will outshine our commemoration of the 40th and that your
commitment to our mission is unshakeable.
Please accept my heartfelt gratitude for the honor of providing the past four years of leadership and for the privilege of being your colleague for the last quarter
century.
Sincerely,
Lisa P. Jackson
Four years ago this month, then President-elect Barack Obama nominated me to be the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, where 21 years earlier I had begun my career in public service as an environmental engineer in the Superfund program. Who says you can’t go home again?
It was a poignant homecoming, and it has been an extraordinary honor to be the champion of the EPA’s dedicated women and men and our vital mission to protect human health and the environment in communities across our great nation. I have witnessed your resolve to make things better for the American people, felt the passion that compels you to go above and beyond for communities in need and marveled at the grace with which you serve the public. So it is both easy and difficult to tell you, my colleagues, that I will be leaving the EPA shortly after the President’s State of the Union address.
As I wrote you earlier this month, we have accomplished so much in the past four years, and I hope you share my pride in our achievements. Because of the work we have done, the air American families breathe, the water they drink and the land on which they live, work and play will be cleaner and healthier for decades to come.
I am grateful to be able to leave the Agency to pursue new challenges with a sense of pride in what we have accomplished and, most of all, with the firm knowledge that you will build upon our achievements in the years to come. I am confident that the EPA’s 50th anniversary will outshine our commemoration of the 40th and that your
commitment to our mission is unshakeable.
Please accept my heartfelt gratitude for the honor of providing the past four years of leadership and for the privilege of being your colleague for the last quarter
century.
Sincerely,
Lisa P. Jackson
Is There Something Wrong with This Picture? January 7, 2012
White House Photo by Flickr
The Good Old Boys are alive and well in the White House, as well as everywhere else in the United States. Of course, the President is one of them, leading a typical GOBs administration, and following in the footsteps of his predeces-sors, especially Bill Clinton. He needs to take a look at what is happening in his offices and those around the government, for which he is responsible and accountable, so that the "War on Women" in the Federal government during his administration can stop.
We have some recommendations, but haven't been contacted yet by "his people" for the go ahead to form "Tigress Teams" to fix the civil rights and whistleblower problems. We are a network of women, dedicated to representing all women as we strive for equality - so we can start in the President's immediate office.
We already marched against the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture (DA), where we rallied against the War on Women in the Forest Service. Secretary Vilsack sent out his Good Old Boys to talk to us, but they didn't actually talk to the women, but instead talked to the male organizer who was with us. So much for equality. When the GOBs finished their little discussion, they turned around and went back into the building and the next sound we heard was one of the women being fired for exposing the sexual harassment while employed in the DA, Forest Service.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Subj: White House War on Women Escalates January 3, 2013 12:37 pm
BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
The White House’s Flickr account recently released a photo of President Barack Obama and his top advisers (shown above). The complete absence of women in the image is another reminder that females are underrepresented in Obama’s staff.
Additionally, the president still pays his female employees significantly less than their male counterparts. The Obama White House in 2011 paid female staffers 18 percent
less than their male colleagues: According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was
about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).
The Obama reelection campaign, though better, was also a bastion of inequality: The Obama reelection campaign’s female employees earned an average of $6,872
during that period, compared with an average of $7,235 for male employees. That is a difference of $363, or 5.3 percent. The annualized pay difference is more than $2,100 per year. It is unclear when Obama and the Democrats will call off the war on women.
We have some recommendations, but haven't been contacted yet by "his people" for the go ahead to form "Tigress Teams" to fix the civil rights and whistleblower problems. We are a network of women, dedicated to representing all women as we strive for equality - so we can start in the President's immediate office.
We already marched against the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture (DA), where we rallied against the War on Women in the Forest Service. Secretary Vilsack sent out his Good Old Boys to talk to us, but they didn't actually talk to the women, but instead talked to the male organizer who was with us. So much for equality. When the GOBs finished their little discussion, they turned around and went back into the building and the next sound we heard was one of the women being fired for exposing the sexual harassment while employed in the DA, Forest Service.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Subj: White House War on Women Escalates January 3, 2013 12:37 pm
BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
The White House’s Flickr account recently released a photo of President Barack Obama and his top advisers (shown above). The complete absence of women in the image is another reminder that females are underrepresented in Obama’s staff.
Additionally, the president still pays his female employees significantly less than their male counterparts. The Obama White House in 2011 paid female staffers 18 percent
less than their male colleagues: According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was
about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).
The Obama reelection campaign, though better, was also a bastion of inequality: The Obama reelection campaign’s female employees earned an average of $6,872
during that period, compared with an average of $7,235 for male employees. That is a difference of $363, or 5.3 percent. The annualized pay difference is more than $2,100 per year. It is unclear when Obama and the Democrats will call off the war on women.
She's At it Again: Wyneva Johnson, Black AUSA, Defending Discriminators
By Ward Jordan OpEdNews Op Eds 12/4/2011 at 16:15:49
Ms. Wyneva Johnson is an African-American female employed with the United States Justice Department. Her disheartening job, as an Assistant United States attorney (AUSA), is to vigorously defend the government against charges of employment discrimination. Johnson, who stated at a Wheaton College commencement reunion held earlier this year that she lived most of her life in the "segregated Mississippi delta", now pridefully serves as guard for those accused of violating the civil rights laws. http://wheatoncollege.edu/quarterly/files/2011/05/Q-570_Wyneva-Johnson.jpg Dr. Marsha Coleman Adebayo, author of the book -- entitled No FEAR: A Whistleblower's Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA, discusses when she first met Johnson. As recounted in the book: No FEAR, http://www.marshacoleman-adebayo.com/ Coleman-Adebayo, a MIT-trained political scientist, tells of her painful encounter opposite another highly educated African-American female, AUSA-Wyneva Johnson. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo exposes how Johnson and other African-American AUSAs are serving as willing pawns of the Department of Justice to defend the government against employment discrimination charges lodged by minority plaintiffs.
Over ten years ago, Dr.Marsha Coleman-Adebayo filed an employment discrimination case against her then-employer, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (Marsha L. Coleman-Adebayo v. Carol M. Browner, Civil Case 98-CV926 and 98-CV-1939). AUSA Wyneva Johnson, a graduate from Wheaton College "class of 71", unsuccessfully defended and lost the government's case against employment discrimination charges lodged by Dr. Coleman-Adebayo. Despite Johnson's best efforts to defend the unlawful actions of EPA public officials, a jury found EPA guilty of race, color and sexual discrimination. The jury also found the EPA guilty of a creating a racially and sexually hostile work environment for Coleman-Adebayo.http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,100423,00.html
Presently, Johnson is defending the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services against the discrimination claims of another highly educated African-American female. The plaintiff in the case is Ms. Arthuretta Holmes-Martin. Holmes-Martin, v. Sebelius, Civil Action No. 07-2128. Ms. Holmes-Martin had served as the HHS Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) Deputy Director before she was terminated from the Department. Ms. Holmes-Martin asserts that "Debbie Ridgely," former Director of HHS's OSDBU, discriminated against her on the basis of her race and retaliated against her for her involvement in protected equal employment opportunity (EEO) activity by transferring her deputy director duties to Clarence Randall (Caucasian male), awarding Randall the title of "Special Advisor," reassigning many of her projects, and terminating her employment. See U.S. District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina's Memorandum Opinion dated March 17, 2010. http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2007cv02128/128537/36In the Memorandum Opinion, U.S. District Judge Urbina found that the plaintiff (Holmes-Martin) offered some evidence that "Ridgely held discriminatory views" (p. 17). Despite evidence of workplace discrimination against Holmes-Martin, AUSA W yneva Johnson, one of DoJ's most senior African-American attorneys, forges vigorously ahead this week to try to convince a jury that HHS is "not guilty" of discriminating against another highly educated, high performing African-American female whose job was to ensure equity in HHS contracting opportuniti es to minorities and women. Wyneva Johnson is at it again.
As stated by Dr.Coleman-Adebayo in her No FEAR book (page 205): "Black AUSAs were statistically nonexistent before the civil rights movement had forced the Department of Justice to hire African Americans and other people of color. Ironically, all those years later, black AUSAs in the Civil Division routinely defended accused discriminators in the federal government and shredded victims of discrimination. One might think that people who had gained their foot hold in society would have had troubled consciences defending discriminators. Yet, had Fredrick Douglass, Martin Luther King, Jr. or Walter Fauntroy filed a complaint of discrimination against the
federal government Wyneva and her cohorts would have vigorously defended the government against their charges."
http//www.coalition4change.org The Coalition For Change, Inc.(C4C). C4C is a "support group" and a proactive non-profit organization comprised of former and present
employees who have been injured or ill-treated due to workplace discrimination and/or reprisal
Ms. Wyneva Johnson is an African-American female employed with the United States Justice Department. Her disheartening job, as an Assistant United States attorney (AUSA), is to vigorously defend the government against charges of employment discrimination. Johnson, who stated at a Wheaton College commencement reunion held earlier this year that she lived most of her life in the "segregated Mississippi delta", now pridefully serves as guard for those accused of violating the civil rights laws. http://wheatoncollege.edu/quarterly/files/2011/05/Q-570_Wyneva-Johnson.jpg Dr. Marsha Coleman Adebayo, author of the book -- entitled No FEAR: A Whistleblower's Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA, discusses when she first met Johnson. As recounted in the book: No FEAR, http://www.marshacoleman-adebayo.com/ Coleman-Adebayo, a MIT-trained political scientist, tells of her painful encounter opposite another highly educated African-American female, AUSA-Wyneva Johnson. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo exposes how Johnson and other African-American AUSAs are serving as willing pawns of the Department of Justice to defend the government against employment discrimination charges lodged by minority plaintiffs.
Over ten years ago, Dr.Marsha Coleman-Adebayo filed an employment discrimination case against her then-employer, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (Marsha L. Coleman-Adebayo v. Carol M. Browner, Civil Case 98-CV926 and 98-CV-1939). AUSA Wyneva Johnson, a graduate from Wheaton College "class of 71", unsuccessfully defended and lost the government's case against employment discrimination charges lodged by Dr. Coleman-Adebayo. Despite Johnson's best efforts to defend the unlawful actions of EPA public officials, a jury found EPA guilty of race, color and sexual discrimination. The jury also found the EPA guilty of a creating a racially and sexually hostile work environment for Coleman-Adebayo.http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,100423,00.html
Presently, Johnson is defending the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services against the discrimination claims of another highly educated African-American female. The plaintiff in the case is Ms. Arthuretta Holmes-Martin. Holmes-Martin, v. Sebelius, Civil Action No. 07-2128. Ms. Holmes-Martin had served as the HHS Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) Deputy Director before she was terminated from the Department. Ms. Holmes-Martin asserts that "Debbie Ridgely," former Director of HHS's OSDBU, discriminated against her on the basis of her race and retaliated against her for her involvement in protected equal employment opportunity (EEO) activity by transferring her deputy director duties to Clarence Randall (Caucasian male), awarding Randall the title of "Special Advisor," reassigning many of her projects, and terminating her employment. See U.S. District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina's Memorandum Opinion dated March 17, 2010. http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2007cv02128/128537/36In the Memorandum Opinion, U.S. District Judge Urbina found that the plaintiff (Holmes-Martin) offered some evidence that "Ridgely held discriminatory views" (p. 17). Despite evidence of workplace discrimination against Holmes-Martin, AUSA W yneva Johnson, one of DoJ's most senior African-American attorneys, forges vigorously ahead this week to try to convince a jury that HHS is "not guilty" of discriminating against another highly educated, high performing African-American female whose job was to ensure equity in HHS contracting opportuniti es to minorities and women. Wyneva Johnson is at it again.
As stated by Dr.Coleman-Adebayo in her No FEAR book (page 205): "Black AUSAs were statistically nonexistent before the civil rights movement had forced the Department of Justice to hire African Americans and other people of color. Ironically, all those years later, black AUSAs in the Civil Division routinely defended accused discriminators in the federal government and shredded victims of discrimination. One might think that people who had gained their foot hold in society would have had troubled consciences defending discriminators. Yet, had Fredrick Douglass, Martin Luther King, Jr. or Walter Fauntroy filed a complaint of discrimination against the
federal government Wyneva and her cohorts would have vigorously defended the government against their charges."
http//www.coalition4change.org The Coalition For Change, Inc.(C4C). C4C is a "support group" and a proactive non-profit organization comprised of former and present
employees who have been injured or ill-treated due to workplace discrimination and/or reprisal
The Sharks are Circling with Blood in the Water at EPA January 4, 2013
Feeding Frenzy at EPA
It's a new year and the sharks are circling the EPA after smelling blood in the water caused by the Lisa Jackson, aka Richard Windsor, email scandal. Inside the beltway, we are all aware of how a Fed goes out on a high note and when they are in trouble, which looked to be the case with Administrator Lisa Jackson, who appeared to be "all smiles" as she stepped down with the President's blessings. Transparency was supposed to be the name of the game under the Obama administration, but it seems no one got the message at EPA.
All the sharks need is a scent of blood in this town before they form a massive school to take down their prey. Supposedly, sharks never sleep and it's no different in the nation's capital as the media reports and adds to the feeding frenzy. Whistleblowers and employees unmercifully taken down during Jackson's tenure can now welcome her into their world, where there is no a safety net in sight and no one cares if you are eaten alive.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge O'Grady in Alexandria ruled that EPA officials exceeded their authority by attempting to regulate stormwater runoff as it would a pollutant in a creek located in Fairfax County, Virginia. He said, "Stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it." Sounds reasonable. But, many sharks only approve environmental restrictions or regulations that don't affect them immediately, taking their lead from Big Business and the Good Ole' Boys Club (GOBs). Come on all you people. We are in the process of destroying our country from pollution. Can't we do something without going right or left? Now that the Judge has spoken, what happens to the polluted creek in Virginia? Let's ask Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli who is going to clean it up now or are we going to just leave it as we have other polluted sites and waters throughout the United States?
All the sharks need is a scent of blood in this town before they form a massive school to take down their prey. Supposedly, sharks never sleep and it's no different in the nation's capital as the media reports and adds to the feeding frenzy. Whistleblowers and employees unmercifully taken down during Jackson's tenure can now welcome her into their world, where there is no a safety net in sight and no one cares if you are eaten alive.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge O'Grady in Alexandria ruled that EPA officials exceeded their authority by attempting to regulate stormwater runoff as it would a pollutant in a creek located in Fairfax County, Virginia. He said, "Stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it." Sounds reasonable. But, many sharks only approve environmental restrictions or regulations that don't affect them immediately, taking their lead from Big Business and the Good Ole' Boys Club (GOBs). Come on all you people. We are in the process of destroying our country from pollution. Can't we do something without going right or left? Now that the Judge has spoken, what happens to the polluted creek in Virginia? Let's ask Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli who is going to clean it up now or are we going to just leave it as we have other polluted sites and waters throughout the United States?
Will the Real Lisa Jackson Stand Up or is that Richard Windsor? New Year's Eve 2012
Can you imagine that Lisa Jackson and former Administrator Carol Browner, both under the Democratic administration, illegally used pseudonyms that allowed them to skirt what they were doing while heading up a Federal agency? This coverup is much more serious than it looks on the surface, plus it's illegal activity on the part of an agency head.
This was happening at the same time she was allowing employees under her leadership to be discriminated against, retaliatied against and abused for blowing the whistle on illegal activities in her administration. She and the minions under her command must have been laughing up their sleeves. Where were those EPA attorneys, 1,000 stong, who assisted her and other managers in bringing actions against employees? Where was the EPA Inspector General's Office when prohibited personnel practices were reported to them by employees? We reported that a female employee taking courses in college, with a mixup occurring for payment, ended up cuffed at her desk and jailed overnight because EPA insisted on making the matter into a Federal case. Did they do the same to Lisa Jackson for violating the Federal law by using a pseudonym or does this country still believe there are two laws - one for the less important people and one for those in power?
We reported many issues in OccupyEPA over the past several years; we marched down Pennsylvania Avenue 300-400 in tow; we protested under Lisa Jackson's office window, so that she that shut down with employees standing in place; we had the security forces on our tails monitoring our activities; we reported the prohibited personnel practices and that the civil right management was engaging in nepotism, discrimination and failing to process complaints; we reported Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation against EPA that she ignored; we reported, reported, reported and reported, but were ignored by her and the administration.
But, as they say - what goes around, comes around - and the rumor is that Ms. Jackson, or Richard Windsor, resigned because of her 12,000 emails, unless she also has another pseudonym that we don't know about. And, this is while the press continues to report that she is on the short list for the Princeton presidency with her eye on Frank Lautenberg's Senate seat.
This was happening at the same time she was allowing employees under her leadership to be discriminated against, retaliatied against and abused for blowing the whistle on illegal activities in her administration. She and the minions under her command must have been laughing up their sleeves. Where were those EPA attorneys, 1,000 stong, who assisted her and other managers in bringing actions against employees? Where was the EPA Inspector General's Office when prohibited personnel practices were reported to them by employees? We reported that a female employee taking courses in college, with a mixup occurring for payment, ended up cuffed at her desk and jailed overnight because EPA insisted on making the matter into a Federal case. Did they do the same to Lisa Jackson for violating the Federal law by using a pseudonym or does this country still believe there are two laws - one for the less important people and one for those in power?
We reported many issues in OccupyEPA over the past several years; we marched down Pennsylvania Avenue 300-400 in tow; we protested under Lisa Jackson's office window, so that she that shut down with employees standing in place; we had the security forces on our tails monitoring our activities; we reported the prohibited personnel practices and that the civil right management was engaging in nepotism, discrimination and failing to process complaints; we reported Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation against EPA that she ignored; we reported, reported, reported and reported, but were ignored by her and the administration.
But, as they say - what goes around, comes around - and the rumor is that Ms. Jackson, or Richard Windsor, resigned because of her 12,000 emails, unless she also has another pseudonym that we don't know about. And, this is while the press continues to report that she is on the short list for the Princeton presidency with her eye on Frank Lautenberg's Senate seat.
What is EPA Chief Lisa Jackson hiding?
By: Audrey Hudson 12/26/2012 01:20 PM
Lisa Jackson is the boss at one of the most contentious government agencies in the Obama administration and is responsible for numerous controversial actions that will have a significant financial effect on American consumers: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
So it’s no wonder Congress is miffed to discover that her decision-making process on key issues was conducted in the most secretive manner Washington has ever devised—under an alias.
Jackson’s secret identity email account name is “Richard Windsor.” The name is part family dog (Richard) and part hometown (East Windsor, N.J.), and it turns out there are at least 12,000 recently discovered but as yet undisclosed emails using her government-approved pseudonym that has prompted two congressional inquiries and an inspector’s general (IG) investigation.
“Our objective is to determine whether EPA follows applicable laws and regulations when using private and alias email accounts to conduct official business,” said the IG’s notice last week announcing the audit.
Meanwhile, the congressional panels want to know how the use of an alias affects transparency—a practice that President Barack Obama pledged to uphold to the highest standard when he was first elected to that office.
“Over the past two years, the Energy and Commerce Committee initiated a number of oversight inquiries seeking information and documents relating to actions and policy decisions at the Environmental Protection Agency, including regulatory actions and major rulemakings that required your review or approval,” Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said in a Dec. 13 letter to Jackson.
“We recognize the utility of a secondary, internal email account for the conduct of agency business. We seek to understand whether conducting business with an alias has in any way affected the transparency of the agency’s activities …” the letter said.
EPA defends itself
The EPA defends the unusual practice that evidence suggests was first put into play by former President Bill Clinton’s EPA Chief Carol Browner, to avoid the millions of emails that pour into the public account listed on the agency’s website.
“We welcome an investigation into this. We don’t have anything to hide,” an EPA spokeswoman told the Washington Post.
The alias account was discovered by Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who revealed the findings in his recent book “The Liberal War on Transparency” (Simon & Schuster).
Horner described his findings as an epidemic of evasion using downright deception.
“On its face, it exhibits an intent to circumvent, frustrate, violate transparency laws,” Horner said. “If you have nothing to hide, why are you going to such great lengths to make it look like you do?”
The epidemic of evasion, using a private or alias email account to mask official business from Freedom of Information Act requests by the media, government watchdogs and the general public, as well as congressional subpoenas and document demands as part of official investigations, goes all the way to the White House, Horner said.
Jim Messina, Obama’s former deputy White House chief of staff and 2012 campaign manager, used his AOL account to lobby drug companies during the Obamacare debate, Horner said. And according to ABC News, the Obama administration coordinated a $150 million advertising campaign with pharmaceutical companies in support of the controversial law.
“The money for the ads was funneled through two Super PACs organized in party by White House officials, including the deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina,” ABC News said.
Additionally, the controversial deal to approve more than $500 million in government-backed loans for the now-bankrupt Solyndra solar panel company was executed on 14 separate private email accounts, Horner said.
Federal law requires that government employees use their official email account for government business.
“This is an epidemic,” Horner said. “Your sure do behave funny, all of you, for people who’ve got nothing to hide. It all comes back to, why use the fake identity? Clearly, this is a very deliberate campaign that’s government-wide.”
“The problem is the behavior top to bottom throughout this administration shows that they seem to think they’ve got plenty to hide,” Horner said.
Horner discovered the alias after reviewing a 2008 memo from the EPA to the National Archives disclosing they had a records management problem with this secondary account that was set to automatically delete emails after 90 days.
“All of that stunk,” Horner said.
Now embroiled in a lawsuit with the government to force the disclosure of Jackson’s secret emails, the Justice Department has revealed the existence of 12,000 emails either addressed to or authored by “Richard Windsor” that included one of four key words submitted by Horner for a search—coal, climate, endanger and MACT, a mercury rule expected to have a devastating impact on the coal industry and coal-fired electricity plants and raise rates for consumers.
“On its face, this is problematic,” Horner said.
Other important issues being decided by Jackson’s EPA are how to control so-called greenhouses gases, setting fuel standards for automobiles and approving an ethanol-based fuel that has been criticized by the AAA automobile association as harmful to some vehicles.
“This (alias email account) can only frustrate the law, because they are required to use this account for very obvious reasons—to keep a record of what they are doing. Not just for Freedom of Information Act requests, but for history. And who knows what’s going to come up in court later? No one had any idea that all of this ‘Richard Windsor’ email—and there is no EPA employee named Richard Windsor—would have been hers? That right there is just staggering that they let her do this,” Horner said.
Interestingly, the practice began with a government-approved alias for Clinton’s EPA chief Browner, who claimed in a lawsuit filed by Mark Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation in 2000 that she did not use her government computer for email. However, a government contractor later testified that she ordered her hard drive and backup tapes destroyed.
Lisa Jackson is the boss at one of the most contentious government agencies in the Obama administration and is responsible for numerous controversial actions that will have a significant financial effect on American consumers: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
So it’s no wonder Congress is miffed to discover that her decision-making process on key issues was conducted in the most secretive manner Washington has ever devised—under an alias.
Jackson’s secret identity email account name is “Richard Windsor.” The name is part family dog (Richard) and part hometown (East Windsor, N.J.), and it turns out there are at least 12,000 recently discovered but as yet undisclosed emails using her government-approved pseudonym that has prompted two congressional inquiries and an inspector’s general (IG) investigation.
“Our objective is to determine whether EPA follows applicable laws and regulations when using private and alias email accounts to conduct official business,” said the IG’s notice last week announcing the audit.
Meanwhile, the congressional panels want to know how the use of an alias affects transparency—a practice that President Barack Obama pledged to uphold to the highest standard when he was first elected to that office.
“Over the past two years, the Energy and Commerce Committee initiated a number of oversight inquiries seeking information and documents relating to actions and policy decisions at the Environmental Protection Agency, including regulatory actions and major rulemakings that required your review or approval,” Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said in a Dec. 13 letter to Jackson.
“We recognize the utility of a secondary, internal email account for the conduct of agency business. We seek to understand whether conducting business with an alias has in any way affected the transparency of the agency’s activities …” the letter said.
EPA defends itself
The EPA defends the unusual practice that evidence suggests was first put into play by former President Bill Clinton’s EPA Chief Carol Browner, to avoid the millions of emails that pour into the public account listed on the agency’s website.
“We welcome an investigation into this. We don’t have anything to hide,” an EPA spokeswoman told the Washington Post.
The alias account was discovered by Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who revealed the findings in his recent book “The Liberal War on Transparency” (Simon & Schuster).
Horner described his findings as an epidemic of evasion using downright deception.
“On its face, it exhibits an intent to circumvent, frustrate, violate transparency laws,” Horner said. “If you have nothing to hide, why are you going to such great lengths to make it look like you do?”
The epidemic of evasion, using a private or alias email account to mask official business from Freedom of Information Act requests by the media, government watchdogs and the general public, as well as congressional subpoenas and document demands as part of official investigations, goes all the way to the White House, Horner said.
Jim Messina, Obama’s former deputy White House chief of staff and 2012 campaign manager, used his AOL account to lobby drug companies during the Obamacare debate, Horner said. And according to ABC News, the Obama administration coordinated a $150 million advertising campaign with pharmaceutical companies in support of the controversial law.
“The money for the ads was funneled through two Super PACs organized in party by White House officials, including the deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina,” ABC News said.
Additionally, the controversial deal to approve more than $500 million in government-backed loans for the now-bankrupt Solyndra solar panel company was executed on 14 separate private email accounts, Horner said.
Federal law requires that government employees use their official email account for government business.
“This is an epidemic,” Horner said. “Your sure do behave funny, all of you, for people who’ve got nothing to hide. It all comes back to, why use the fake identity? Clearly, this is a very deliberate campaign that’s government-wide.”
“The problem is the behavior top to bottom throughout this administration shows that they seem to think they’ve got plenty to hide,” Horner said.
Horner discovered the alias after reviewing a 2008 memo from the EPA to the National Archives disclosing they had a records management problem with this secondary account that was set to automatically delete emails after 90 days.
“All of that stunk,” Horner said.
Now embroiled in a lawsuit with the government to force the disclosure of Jackson’s secret emails, the Justice Department has revealed the existence of 12,000 emails either addressed to or authored by “Richard Windsor” that included one of four key words submitted by Horner for a search—coal, climate, endanger and MACT, a mercury rule expected to have a devastating impact on the coal industry and coal-fired electricity plants and raise rates for consumers.
“On its face, this is problematic,” Horner said.
Other important issues being decided by Jackson’s EPA are how to control so-called greenhouses gases, setting fuel standards for automobiles and approving an ethanol-based fuel that has been criticized by the AAA automobile association as harmful to some vehicles.
“This (alias email account) can only frustrate the law, because they are required to use this account for very obvious reasons—to keep a record of what they are doing. Not just for Freedom of Information Act requests, but for history. And who knows what’s going to come up in court later? No one had any idea that all of this ‘Richard Windsor’ email—and there is no EPA employee named Richard Windsor—would have been hers? That right there is just staggering that they let her do this,” Horner said.
Interestingly, the practice began with a government-approved alias for Clinton’s EPA chief Browner, who claimed in a lawsuit filed by Mark Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation in 2000 that she did not use her government computer for email. However, a government contractor later testified that she ordered her hard drive and backup tapes destroyed.
Washington Post Glorifies Jackson's Performance December 28, 2012
The Post reported (below) that Jackson "joked" about her resignation as the Administrator of EPA, the first Black female to hold the post. But, it's certainly not a joking matter to those men and women she is leaving behind to deal with the years of failed internal management that
resulted in whistleblowers being destroyed, a "War on Women" being ignored, community environmental and internal discrimination complaints languishing in the system, a mismanaged civil rights office, and major protests asking her to take appropriate action, which never happened (see other articles on this site)
The Post neglects to mention that under Ms. Jackson's leadership, her internal management resulted in numerous internal/external complaints, major Occupy protests, including 300-400 people march down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington to her office, retaliation findings from the Office of Special Counsel, along with a report by Deloitte Consulting outlining years of mismanagement in the Office of Civil Rights.
"For years, EPA has continued to just move around the problem managers, while taking action against employees who protested corruption and prohibited personnel practices. The Office of Civil Rights is a prime example of what they do to put fear into employees when they disagree. Having worked for four major Departments and industry in management and civil rights, I never witnessed anything even close to what happens at EPA - whistleblowers are retaliated against, employees are criminally prosecuted, women are taken out in handcuffs, employees are put in jail - it's a disgrace. Yet, laws and regulations are violated and the protesters are destroyed for exposing the culprits, who go on to collect their enormous paychecks and live on to go after other poor unsuspecting employees," said whistleblower Susan Morris. With respect to appointments of insiders for the position as Administrator, Morris stated, "Ms. Jackson, her Deputy Bob Perciasepe, who once scolded me for mispronouncing his name when I introduced him to my husband, and other key managers, had every opportunity to turn some of the management problems around, but chose to support their cronies or look the other way. The last two Administrators were EPA civilians prior to taking office - Steve Johnson under President Busch and then Lisa Jackson. Steve Johnson made it clear to employees that he was going to support certain managers and some of those same managers were supported by Ms. Jackson. I think it's time for the President to clean house instead of shifting the problems around. EPA needs some fresh air itself."
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:14:56 AM National News Alert
EPA head Lisa Jackson to resign post
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, who pushed through the most sweeping curbs on air pollution in two decades, announced Thursday morning she will resign her post.
Jackson, who will step down shortly after President Obama’s State of the Union address next month, has not accepted another job at this time, according to several individuals who have spoken with her. Many expected she would not remain for the administration’s second term; Jackson herself joked about it recently.
The slew of rules EPA enacted over the past four years — including the first-ever greenhouse gas standards for vehicles, cuts in mercury and other toxic pollution from power plants and a tighter limit on soot, the nation’s most widespread deadly pollutant — prompted many congressional Republicans and business groups to suggest Jackson was waging a “war on coal.” But it also made Jackson a hero to the environmental community, who viewed her as their most high-profile advocate within the Obama administration.
Read more below or go to: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/epa-head-jackson-to-resign-post/2012/12/27/50637f50-4fda-11e2-8b49-64675006147f_story.html By Juliet Eilperin, Dec 27, 2012 04:46 PM EST The Washington Post
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, who pushed through the most sweeping curbs on air pollution in two decades, announced Thursday morning that she will resign her post.
Jackson, who will step down shortly after President Obama’s State of the Union address next month, said she was “ready in my own life for new challenges, time with my family and new opportunities to make a difference.” Many had expected that she would not remain for the administration’s second term; Jackson herself joked about it recently.
Outspoken on issues including climate change and the need to protect poor communities from experiencing a disproportionate amount of environmental harm, Jackson pressed for limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants and on dumping mining waste into streams and rivers near mines.
The slew of rules the EPA enacted over the past four years included the first greenhouse-gas standards for vehicles, cuts in mercury and other toxic pollution from power
plantsand a tighter limit on soot, the nation’s most widespread deadly pollutant. Many congressional Republicans and business groups claimed Jackson was waging a “war on coal.” But she was a hero to the environmental community.
The president issued a statement praising Jackson.
“Under her leadership, the EPA has taken sensible and important steps to protect the air we breathe and the water we drink, including implementing the first national standard for harmful mercury pollution, taking important action to combat climate change under the Clean Air Act, and playing a key role in establishing historic fuel economy standards that will save the average American family thousands of dollars at the pump while also slashing carbon pollution,” Obama said.
Obama has not picked her successor, although two of the leading candidates work at the EPA: Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe and Gina McCarthy, who heads the agency’s air and radiation office. Jackson has told several people she considers Perciasepe well prepared to take the agency’s helm.
Both Perciasepe and McCarthy could face challenges in getting confirmed by the Senate since they helped craft many of the EPA’s policies during Obama’s first term. But they are also seen as career officials rather than political activists. Stephen Brown, vice president for federal government affairs at the oil refiner Tesoro Corp., said Perciasepe represents “a sound choice” because he “knows the job, the agency and the hurdles associated with both.”
Other possible successors include Mary D. Nichols, head of the California Air Resources Board, and Kathleen McGinty, who headed the White House Council on Environmental Quality under President Bill Clinton.
Sen. David Vitter (La.), the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said Thursday he would seek a more business-friendly nominee to run the agency. “Moving forward I’ll be working with my colleagues in the Senate to make sure the new nominee is thoroughly vetted, puts sound scientific standards above political ideology and understands that EPA’s avalanche of regulations can crush the growth of American businesses,” he said in a statement.
EPA head Lisa Jackson to resign post
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, who pushed through the most sweeping curbs on air pollution in two decades, announced Thursday morning she will resign her post.
Jackson, who will step down shortly after President Obama’s State of the Union address next month, has not accepted another job at this time, according to several individuals who have spoken with her. Many expected she would not remain for the administration’s second term; Jackson herself joked about it recently.
The slew of rules EPA enacted over the past four years — including the first-ever greenhouse gas standards for vehicles, cuts in mercury and other toxic pollution from power plants and a tighter limit on soot, the nation’s most widespread deadly pollutant — prompted many congressional Republicans and business groups to suggest Jackson was waging a “war on coal.” But it also made Jackson a hero to the environmental community, who viewed her as their most high-profile advocate within the Obama administration.
Read more below or go to: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/epa-head-jackson-to-resign-post/2012/12/27/50637f50-4fda-11e2-8b49-64675006147f_story.html By Juliet Eilperin, Dec 27, 2012 04:46 PM EST The Washington Post
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, who pushed through the most sweeping curbs on air pollution in two decades, announced Thursday morning that she will resign her post.
Jackson, who will step down shortly after President Obama’s State of the Union address next month, said she was “ready in my own life for new challenges, time with my family and new opportunities to make a difference.” Many had expected that she would not remain for the administration’s second term; Jackson herself joked about it recently.
Outspoken on issues including climate change and the need to protect poor communities from experiencing a disproportionate amount of environmental harm, Jackson pressed for limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants and on dumping mining waste into streams and rivers near mines.
The slew of rules the EPA enacted over the past four years included the first greenhouse-gas standards for vehicles, cuts in mercury and other toxic pollution from power
plantsand a tighter limit on soot, the nation’s most widespread deadly pollutant. Many congressional Republicans and business groups claimed Jackson was waging a “war on coal.” But she was a hero to the environmental community.
The president issued a statement praising Jackson.
“Under her leadership, the EPA has taken sensible and important steps to protect the air we breathe and the water we drink, including implementing the first national standard for harmful mercury pollution, taking important action to combat climate change under the Clean Air Act, and playing a key role in establishing historic fuel economy standards that will save the average American family thousands of dollars at the pump while also slashing carbon pollution,” Obama said.
Obama has not picked her successor, although two of the leading candidates work at the EPA: Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe and Gina McCarthy, who heads the agency’s air and radiation office. Jackson has told several people she considers Perciasepe well prepared to take the agency’s helm.
Both Perciasepe and McCarthy could face challenges in getting confirmed by the Senate since they helped craft many of the EPA’s policies during Obama’s first term. But they are also seen as career officials rather than political activists. Stephen Brown, vice president for federal government affairs at the oil refiner Tesoro Corp., said Perciasepe represents “a sound choice” because he “knows the job, the agency and the hurdles associated with both.”
Other possible successors include Mary D. Nichols, head of the California Air Resources Board, and Kathleen McGinty, who headed the White House Council on Environmental Quality under President Bill Clinton.
Sen. David Vitter (La.), the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said Thursday he would seek a more business-friendly nominee to run the agency. “Moving forward I’ll be working with my colleagues in the Senate to make sure the new nominee is thoroughly vetted, puts sound scientific standards above political ideology and understands that EPA’s avalanche of regulations can crush the growth of American businesses,” he said in a statement.
Lisa Jackson Resigns: EPA Administrator Stepping Down December 27, 2012
New Jersey - Here She Comes!!
EPA Administrator Jackson not only failed to get through major environmental programs, she also failed to take care of personnel matters that marred her administration, particularly when it came to women's rights. Women protested, along with Occupy groups, after finding that Ms. Jackson ignored their concerns that included her ill-advised appointment of Rafael DeLeon as the civil rights director, failure to process discrimination complaints from environmental groups and employees in accordance with regulations, ignoring whistleblowing retaliation findings from the Office of Special Counsel, allowing women to be taken out in handcuffs, and generally taking a hands-off position instead of stepping forward as the first black female administrator for EPA.
Rumored to be on the short-list for the presidency of Princeton University and running for the New Jersey Senator Lautenberg's seat, she appears to believe that the "EPA War Against Women" during her administration will not follow her. "I'm a native of New Jersey," said Susan Morris, former Assistant Director in the EPA Office of Civil Rights. "I plan to use my influence and connections in my home State as this country moves onto the next four years and another election. I can personally attest to the fact that Ms. Jackson is leaving behind a polluted internal work environment that has destroyed numerous committed and dedicated public servants.
She still has a few weeks as a lame duck to fix the destruction wrought on these individuals. Hopefully she will do the right thing."
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
AP | By KEVIN FREKING Posted: 12/27/2012 10:01 am EST | Updated: 12/27/2012 10:21 am EST
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration's chief environmental watchdog, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, is stepping down after a nearly four-year tenure marked by high-profile brawls over global warming pollution, the Keystone XL oil pipeline, new controls on coal-fired plants and several other hot-button issues that affect the nation's economy and people's health.
Jackson, the agency's first black administrator, constantly found herself caught between administration pledges to solve controversial environmental problems and steady resistance from Republicans and industrial groups who complained that the agency's rules destroyed jobs and made it harder for American companies to compete internationally.
The GOP chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton, said last year that Jackson would need her own parking spot at the Capitol because he planned to bring her in so frequently for questioning. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney called for her firing, a stance that had little downside during the GOP primary.
Jackson, 50, a chemical engineer by training, did not point to any particular reason for her departure. Historically, Cabinet members looking to move on will leave at the beginning of a president's second term.
"I will leave the EPA confident the ship is sailing in the right direction, and ready in my own life for new challenges, time with my family and new opportunities to make a difference," she said in a statement. Jackson gave no exact date for her departure, but will leave after Obama's State of the Union address in late January.
In a separate statement, Obama said Jackson has been "an important part of my team." He thanked her for serving and praised her "unwavering commitment" to the
public's health.
"Under her leadership, the EPA has taken sensible and important steps to protect the air we breathe and the water we drink, including implementing the first national standard for harmful mercury pollution, taking important action to combat climate change under the Clean Air Act and playing a key role in establishing historic fuel economy standards that will save the average American family thousands of dollars at the pump, while also slashing carbon pollution."
Environmental groups had high expectations for the Obama administration after eight years of President George W. Bush, a Texas oilman who rebuffed the agency's scientists and refused to take action on climate change. Jackson came into office promising a more active EPA.
But she soon learned that changes would not occur as quickly as she had hoped. Jackson watched as a Democratic-led effort to reduce global warming emissions passed the House in 2009 but was abandoned by the Senate as economic concerns became the priority. The concept behind the bill, referred to as cap-and-trade, would have set up a system in which power companies bought and sold pollution rights.
"That's a revolutionary message for our country," Jackson said at a Paris conference a few months after taking the job.
Jackson experienced another big setback last year when the administration scrubbed a clean-air regulation aimed at reducing health-threatening smog. Republican lawmakers had been hammering the president over the proposed rule, accusing his administration of making it harder for companies to create jobs.
She also vowed to better control toxic coal ash after a massive spill in Tennessee, but that regulation has yet to be finalized more than four years after the spill.
Jackson had some victories, too. During her tenure, the administration finalized a new rule doubling fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks. The requirements will be phased in over 13 years and eventually require all new vehicles to average 54.5 mpg, up from 28.6 mpg at the end of last year.
She shepherded another rule that forces power plants to control mercury and other toxic pollutants for the first time. Previously, the nation's coal- and oil-fired power plants had been allowed to run without addressing their full environmental and public health costs.
Jackson also helped persuade the administration to table the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought carbon-heavy tar sands oil from Canada to refineries in Texas.
House Republicans dedicated much of their time this past election year trying to rein in the EPA. They passed a bill seeking to thwart regulation of the coal industry and quash the stricter fuel efficiency standards. In the end, though, the bill made no headway in the Senate. It served mostly as election-year fodder that appeared to have little impact on the presidential election.
Rumored to be on the short-list for the presidency of Princeton University and running for the New Jersey Senator Lautenberg's seat, she appears to believe that the "EPA War Against Women" during her administration will not follow her. "I'm a native of New Jersey," said Susan Morris, former Assistant Director in the EPA Office of Civil Rights. "I plan to use my influence and connections in my home State as this country moves onto the next four years and another election. I can personally attest to the fact that Ms. Jackson is leaving behind a polluted internal work environment that has destroyed numerous committed and dedicated public servants.
She still has a few weeks as a lame duck to fix the destruction wrought on these individuals. Hopefully she will do the right thing."
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
AP | By KEVIN FREKING Posted: 12/27/2012 10:01 am EST | Updated: 12/27/2012 10:21 am EST
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration's chief environmental watchdog, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, is stepping down after a nearly four-year tenure marked by high-profile brawls over global warming pollution, the Keystone XL oil pipeline, new controls on coal-fired plants and several other hot-button issues that affect the nation's economy and people's health.
Jackson, the agency's first black administrator, constantly found herself caught between administration pledges to solve controversial environmental problems and steady resistance from Republicans and industrial groups who complained that the agency's rules destroyed jobs and made it harder for American companies to compete internationally.
The GOP chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton, said last year that Jackson would need her own parking spot at the Capitol because he planned to bring her in so frequently for questioning. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney called for her firing, a stance that had little downside during the GOP primary.
Jackson, 50, a chemical engineer by training, did not point to any particular reason for her departure. Historically, Cabinet members looking to move on will leave at the beginning of a president's second term.
"I will leave the EPA confident the ship is sailing in the right direction, and ready in my own life for new challenges, time with my family and new opportunities to make a difference," she said in a statement. Jackson gave no exact date for her departure, but will leave after Obama's State of the Union address in late January.
In a separate statement, Obama said Jackson has been "an important part of my team." He thanked her for serving and praised her "unwavering commitment" to the
public's health.
"Under her leadership, the EPA has taken sensible and important steps to protect the air we breathe and the water we drink, including implementing the first national standard for harmful mercury pollution, taking important action to combat climate change under the Clean Air Act and playing a key role in establishing historic fuel economy standards that will save the average American family thousands of dollars at the pump, while also slashing carbon pollution."
Environmental groups had high expectations for the Obama administration after eight years of President George W. Bush, a Texas oilman who rebuffed the agency's scientists and refused to take action on climate change. Jackson came into office promising a more active EPA.
But she soon learned that changes would not occur as quickly as she had hoped. Jackson watched as a Democratic-led effort to reduce global warming emissions passed the House in 2009 but was abandoned by the Senate as economic concerns became the priority. The concept behind the bill, referred to as cap-and-trade, would have set up a system in which power companies bought and sold pollution rights.
"That's a revolutionary message for our country," Jackson said at a Paris conference a few months after taking the job.
Jackson experienced another big setback last year when the administration scrubbed a clean-air regulation aimed at reducing health-threatening smog. Republican lawmakers had been hammering the president over the proposed rule, accusing his administration of making it harder for companies to create jobs.
She also vowed to better control toxic coal ash after a massive spill in Tennessee, but that regulation has yet to be finalized more than four years after the spill.
Jackson had some victories, too. During her tenure, the administration finalized a new rule doubling fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks. The requirements will be phased in over 13 years and eventually require all new vehicles to average 54.5 mpg, up from 28.6 mpg at the end of last year.
She shepherded another rule that forces power plants to control mercury and other toxic pollutants for the first time. Previously, the nation's coal- and oil-fired power plants had been allowed to run without addressing their full environmental and public health costs.
Jackson also helped persuade the administration to table the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought carbon-heavy tar sands oil from Canada to refineries in Texas.
House Republicans dedicated much of their time this past election year trying to rein in the EPA. They passed a bill seeking to thwart regulation of the coal industry and quash the stricter fuel efficiency standards. In the end, though, the bill made no headway in the Senate. It served mostly as election-year fodder that appeared to have little impact on the presidential election.
Occupy Groups Being Monitored in US - No Surprise
EPA to Princeton and the NJ Senate? December 21, 2012
Evidently, the "EPA War on Women" under Lisa Jackson's leadership doesn't matter in our current politically and morally bankrupt country. President Obama's political appointees are getting ready to move on to big and better things as they prepare for the next election or just cash in on their boss' win against the Republicans. We previously reported the rumors that Ms. Jackson is getting ready to run for Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg's seat in NJ.
The message appears to be that you destroy the lives of women (and men) at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, who were just trying to do their jobs as Federal civilian employees, then simply move on without any consequences. Interestingly, one of those retaliated against by EPA management is a New Jersey native, graduate of Rutgers College, and former publisher of a women's newsletter that was distributed throughout the New York/New Jersey metropolitan area, which included a story on Hillary Clinton. "I plan to continue to fight corruption within the Federal government and will remain a vocal advocate for change that is beneficial to our country and its citizens. I was born and raised in New Jersey, where you were taught to speak out against injustice and defend yourself from bullies," said Susan Morris, former Assistant Director in the EPA Office of Civil Rights. "As a subject matter expert in civil rights and management, after working for four major federal Departments and industry for many years, I offerred to assist the Obama administration, specifically EPA and Agriculture, in cleaning up their civil rights problems and abuses. They should take me up on my offer, partricularly Lisa Jackson, before she moves to my home town, among my NJ people," she said. "Ms. Jackson grew up in the 9th Ward of New Orleans, went to college at Tulane University and graduated with a degree in chemical engineering after which she got a Masters from Princeton.
We recommend that Ms. Jackson clean up the damage she and her management has done to employees over the last four years before she moves on and takes her sad history with her to NJ. OccupyEPA and a number of other organizations will continue to follow Ms. Jackson as she attempts to move up and out of town, leaving behind those she demolished in her path.
The message appears to be that you destroy the lives of women (and men) at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, who were just trying to do their jobs as Federal civilian employees, then simply move on without any consequences. Interestingly, one of those retaliated against by EPA management is a New Jersey native, graduate of Rutgers College, and former publisher of a women's newsletter that was distributed throughout the New York/New Jersey metropolitan area, which included a story on Hillary Clinton. "I plan to continue to fight corruption within the Federal government and will remain a vocal advocate for change that is beneficial to our country and its citizens. I was born and raised in New Jersey, where you were taught to speak out against injustice and defend yourself from bullies," said Susan Morris, former Assistant Director in the EPA Office of Civil Rights. "As a subject matter expert in civil rights and management, after working for four major federal Departments and industry for many years, I offerred to assist the Obama administration, specifically EPA and Agriculture, in cleaning up their civil rights problems and abuses. They should take me up on my offer, partricularly Lisa Jackson, before she moves to my home town, among my NJ people," she said. "Ms. Jackson grew up in the 9th Ward of New Orleans, went to college at Tulane University and graduated with a degree in chemical engineering after which she got a Masters from Princeton.
We recommend that Ms. Jackson clean up the damage she and her management has done to employees over the last four years before she moves on and takes her sad history with her to NJ. OccupyEPA and a number of other organizations will continue to follow Ms. Jackson as she attempts to move up and out of town, leaving behind those she demolished in her path.
Jackson, from EPA to Princeton? December 21, 2012
Al Kamen In the Loop
Kevin Wolf/AP - EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s name is among those being floated as possible candidates for the presidency of Princeton, where she got a graduate engineering degree.
By Al Kamen, Dec 19, 2012 01:11 AM EST The Washington PostPublished: December 18
We’ve known that Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson has been planning her exit from the Cabinet, and now we hear she’s exploring that well-worn path from government-officialdom to academia.
Jackson is talking to some university officials, we’re told, and her name is among those being floated as possible candidates for the presidency of Princeton, the institution where she got a graduate engineering degree.
University President Shirley Tilghman (Princeton’s first female chief) plans to step down at the end of this academic year; a search committee is still in the midst of its work and is expected to make a recommendation to the university’s trustees next spring, the Princetonian reports.
We hear the headhunting panel is still in the “building-a-big-list phase,” so Jackson is no doubt in illustrious — and copious — company. (Hey, at least one candidate she won’t have to beat out for the job is former CIA director David Petraeus, who was in the running before his sex scandal.)
An EPA spokeswoman, not surprisingly, had no comment.
And the ivory tower may not be Jackson’s final destination in her post-Cabinet career — it’s also thought that she has a bright future in New Jersey politics. She’s been mentioned as a possible candidate to run for the seat now held by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), if he were to retire. One likely successor at the EPA is Bob Perciasepe, the current deputy administrator, who headed the EPA’s air and radiation office under President Bill Clinton.
And speaking of possible Cabinet moves, everyone in enviroland believes that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is leaving. The question is when. It’s not that they don’t like Salazar — they do.
It’s that they fear the dreaded lame duck is going to quack in the not-too-distant future and if the enviros are going to get new legislation and regulations approved, it would be best to start with a new secretary now rather than, say, a year from now.
The front-runners for the job still appear to be Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire (D) and retiring Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), who says he doesn’t want it (but it would be a tough offer to refuse).
Meanwhile, Deputy Energy Secretary David Hayes, though mentioned as possibly moving up (and he’s always mentioned as a possible candidate — he’s “the Susan Lucci of the Cabinet,” according to one observer), is said to be on the shortlist to replace White House Council on Environmental Quality chair Nancy Sutley, who’s getting ready to decamp.
Kevin Wolf/AP - EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s name is among those being floated as possible candidates for the presidency of Princeton, where she got a graduate engineering degree.
By Al Kamen, Dec 19, 2012 01:11 AM EST The Washington PostPublished: December 18
We’ve known that Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson has been planning her exit from the Cabinet, and now we hear she’s exploring that well-worn path from government-officialdom to academia.
Jackson is talking to some university officials, we’re told, and her name is among those being floated as possible candidates for the presidency of Princeton, the institution where she got a graduate engineering degree.
University President Shirley Tilghman (Princeton’s first female chief) plans to step down at the end of this academic year; a search committee is still in the midst of its work and is expected to make a recommendation to the university’s trustees next spring, the Princetonian reports.
We hear the headhunting panel is still in the “building-a-big-list phase,” so Jackson is no doubt in illustrious — and copious — company. (Hey, at least one candidate she won’t have to beat out for the job is former CIA director David Petraeus, who was in the running before his sex scandal.)
An EPA spokeswoman, not surprisingly, had no comment.
And the ivory tower may not be Jackson’s final destination in her post-Cabinet career — it’s also thought that she has a bright future in New Jersey politics. She’s been mentioned as a possible candidate to run for the seat now held by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), if he were to retire. One likely successor at the EPA is Bob Perciasepe, the current deputy administrator, who headed the EPA’s air and radiation office under President Bill Clinton.
And speaking of possible Cabinet moves, everyone in enviroland believes that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is leaving. The question is when. It’s not that they don’t like Salazar — they do.
It’s that they fear the dreaded lame duck is going to quack in the not-too-distant future and if the enviros are going to get new legislation and regulations approved, it would be best to start with a new secretary now rather than, say, a year from now.
The front-runners for the job still appear to be Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire (D) and retiring Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), who says he doesn’t want it (but it would be a tough offer to refuse).
Meanwhile, Deputy Energy Secretary David Hayes, though mentioned as possibly moving up (and he’s always mentioned as a possible candidate — he’s “the Susan Lucci of the Cabinet,” according to one observer), is said to be on the shortlist to replace White House Council on Environmental Quality chair Nancy Sutley, who’s getting ready to decamp.
The "Rafael Must Go" Campaign ---- The Word is Out! December 11, 2012
PINK ELEPHANTS CELEBRATING!!
Instead of trumpeting "Rafael Must Go" -- the PINK Elephants are marching to "Rafael is Going,Going, and finally GONE!!" In a ceremonial-type glorification meeting with the Chief of Staff, Diane Thompson, and her Deputy, announced that the Office of Civil Rights Director, Rafael DeLeon, is leaving that office in January. Celebrations were being planned as soon as the announcement was made and the meeting over. Unfortunately for another poor group of employees, he is heading their way, so they may as well not hope for a good new year, after all - it will be two thousand 13! So, they may as well just duck down, be prepared to kiss up, or just get in line.
The sighs of relief and trumpeting were so loud, they reverberated throughout the Washington, DC Metropolitan area. Luckily, elephants have very long memories, especially those who are called pink. The EPA employees, particularly women, who were taken out in handcuffs, charged criminally, and retaliated against, will remember.
The sighs of relief and trumpeting were so loud, they reverberated throughout the Washington, DC Metropolitan area. Luckily, elephants have very long memories, especially those who are called pink. The EPA employees, particularly women, who were taken out in handcuffs, charged criminally, and retaliated against, will remember.
EPA Should be Investigated December 6, 2012
Women being taken out in handcuffs and jail time for Federal EPA employees seems to be the modus operandi for dealing with the employees, particularly the women, who complain about violations. We previously reported that a young female employee was terrified because the EPA guards were sent to her desk, handcuffed her, marched her through the building, and had her jailed overnight for a credit card matter regarding two approved training courses. Another senior female received the same treatment when she was handcuffed by the guards at her desk and taken out the front door, as if she were a criminal. A Senior EPA Employee, who had faulted the Civil Rights Director for mis-management of that office was summarily dismissed, escorted out, after which there was an attempt to have her
blackballed from working at EPA. Another EPA tactic is sending former employees with letters stating that they have been "Banned" from entering the Federal EPA building after putting them through the retaliatory gauntlet.
Of course, this is all being done to send a message to employees who are considering exposing violations or complaining that this could happen to them if they do. EPA has sent allegations (even from anonymous sources) of wrongdoing to the criminal division for possible prosecution in an atempt to destroy the employee rather than handling the matter internally under the regulations. It appears that the country is not only on a fiscal cliff, but a moral one as well. As Professor Noam Chomsky said in a video produced on behalf of the over 300 OccupyEPA protestors during a march against the agency, EPA has a "sordid history" of violations. One of the more egregious cases is that of Jon Grand.
Jon Grand was a senior male employee who, at the last minute, agreed to appear as a witness in the Marsha Coleman-Adebayo case against EPA. Thereafter, he naively took advice from his cronies and attorney who led him down a slippery path to incarceration. His case was a result of EPA's administrative accounting errors that continued after a special assignment he was on ended. You can read the following interview conducted with Jon by Corporate Crime Reporter, Russell Mokhiber, in late
October 2011. EPA continues to show employees that they must constantly fear being taken out in handcuffs, being brought up on criminal charges and imprisoned, along with being banned as a non-criminal from entering a Federal building. This small agency with only 17,000 employees (1,000 who are attorneys), and a mission to work on behalf of the taxpayers to protect the land, air and water, appears to be morally bankrupt. Would you or any parent of an environmentally-conscious daughter or son send them to work in this type of envrionment? EPA needs a breath of fresh air itself and thus far it appears that no one is willing to open the doors and let it in.
We believe this horrendous and scary work environment at EPA is intentional and meant to have a chilling effect on employees who are considering filing complaints or attempting to expose corruption within the agency. Where is the EPA Office of Inspector General and why did they look the other way while senior officials violated laws and regulations? Why would corporations want to uphold the environmental laws when the agency ignores the laws themselves? We had hoped for change under the Obama administration, but instead it just got worse. Someone should step in, investigate, and stop the madness.
_________________________________________________________________________________
blackballed from working at EPA. Another EPA tactic is sending former employees with letters stating that they have been "Banned" from entering the Federal EPA building after putting them through the retaliatory gauntlet.
Of course, this is all being done to send a message to employees who are considering exposing violations or complaining that this could happen to them if they do. EPA has sent allegations (even from anonymous sources) of wrongdoing to the criminal division for possible prosecution in an atempt to destroy the employee rather than handling the matter internally under the regulations. It appears that the country is not only on a fiscal cliff, but a moral one as well. As Professor Noam Chomsky said in a video produced on behalf of the over 300 OccupyEPA protestors during a march against the agency, EPA has a "sordid history" of violations. One of the more egregious cases is that of Jon Grand.
Jon Grand was a senior male employee who, at the last minute, agreed to appear as a witness in the Marsha Coleman-Adebayo case against EPA. Thereafter, he naively took advice from his cronies and attorney who led him down a slippery path to incarceration. His case was a result of EPA's administrative accounting errors that continued after a special assignment he was on ended. You can read the following interview conducted with Jon by Corporate Crime Reporter, Russell Mokhiber, in late
October 2011. EPA continues to show employees that they must constantly fear being taken out in handcuffs, being brought up on criminal charges and imprisoned, along with being banned as a non-criminal from entering a Federal building. This small agency with only 17,000 employees (1,000 who are attorneys), and a mission to work on behalf of the taxpayers to protect the land, air and water, appears to be morally bankrupt. Would you or any parent of an environmentally-conscious daughter or son send them to work in this type of envrionment? EPA needs a breath of fresh air itself and thus far it appears that no one is willing to open the doors and let it in.
We believe this horrendous and scary work environment at EPA is intentional and meant to have a chilling effect on employees who are considering filing complaints or attempting to expose corruption within the agency. Where is the EPA Office of Inspector General and why did they look the other way while senior officials violated laws and regulations? Why would corporations want to uphold the environmental laws when the agency ignores the laws themselves? We had hoped for change under the Obama administration, but instead it just got worse. Someone should step in, investigate, and stop the madness.
_________________________________________________________________________________
EPA Puts Jon Grand in Prison by Russell Mokhiber
CommonDreams Published on Monday, October 31, 2011 by Corporate Crime Reporter
Where are the criminal prosecutions of the major corporations responsible for the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico? Still nowhere to be found. Where are the prosecutors? Where is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)? Not prosecuting major polluters.
Instead, what are they doing? Cracking down on whistleblowers. And those who support whistleblowers. While the corporate crooks are running free.
Next time you think of this disparity of justice, remember these two words: Jon Grand.
For more than twenty years, Grand was a senior administrator at the EPA in Chicago. Never had a run in with the law.
Then, he made the mistake of supporting an EPA whistleblower.
In 2000, Grand was talking on the phone with colleagues in Washington.
And the EPA people in Washington were making disparaging remarks about Marsha Coleman-Adebayo – a young African-American EPA staffer who was suing the EPA and its administrator –Carol Browner – for race and sex discrimination.
“They said they all had to be in Washington because ‘the Rosa Parks of the EPA’ was suing the administrator,” Grand told Corporate Crime Reporter in an interview
last week.
“They meant that Marsha was setting herself up as someone who she wasn’t – Rosa Parks,” Grand said. “She was trying to pretend she was a civil rights crusader – suing
people and so on. It was very derogatory.”
Grand had never heard of Coleman-Adebayo – or of her lawsuit.
But Coleman-Adebayo heard about the Rose Parks comment and asked Grand to fly to Washington and testify on her behalf at trial.
And Grand did. And it was a pivotal moment in the trial.
“I sensed that the jury was very aware of my being there – I was a bit startled by that,” Grand said. “And second, the fact that I was a high ranking manager coming in to refute the old boys club did in fact carry some weight.”
The jury returned a $600,000 verdict for Coleman-Adebayo – the largest such verdict in this type of case against the EPA. (NOTE: There is a $300,000 cap under the law, so it was automatically reduced)
How did the EPA respond to Grand’s testimony?
Retaliation.
First they refused to approve of the last $200,000 for a project he was working on.
Then, his colleagues in Washington, D.C. began to shun him.
“And I had occasion to go into Washington to meet with some people outside of the Office of International Activities,” Grand said. “But as I always did, I went over to see
if there was anything they needed out of the Region or they wanted me to do.”
“As I walked down the hall, door after door after door was closed on me.”
They were closed, or they were closing as you walked down the hall?
“They were closing.”
Like a movie?
“Yes,” Grand said. “It’s the old Amish game of shunning.”
But then, the EPA escalated its retaliation against Grand.
It’s a complicated story, but here it is in a nutshell.
From 1997 to 1999, Grand was assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Copenhagen, Denmark.
He was given a housing allowance of about $20,000 a year.
When he returned, the EPA kept giving him an additional $890 every paycheck – the housing allowance.
According to Grand, the EPA has a history of making these kinds of payroll mistakes.
In 2004, the EPA instituted a new “time and management system.”
Grand’s housing allowance was flagged.
“They talked to me about it,” Grand said. “And I said – yes, that’s what it looks like. I called the EPA Comptroller’s office in Washington. We set up a payment plan. And
they began taking the money out of my paycheck to repay it.”
Grand thought that was the end of it.
Nope.
“I was called into the Acting Deputy Regional Administrator’s Office and told that someone had called the EPA Inspector General about possible criminal charges,”
Grand said. “That was happening in the 2003 and 2004 time period.”
“I said – I thought we had that resolved.”
“He said – no, you are going to be put on administrative leave. And the IG will contact you.”
“I wasn’t overly concerned about it.”
They say criminal investigation and you are not overly concerned?
“Only because we had an agreement with the agency. And my view was if there was a problem, they would have not agreed to it.”
“But since we had a working agreement that was working smoothly, I thought – this is somebody trying to make trouble. Which happens.” IG attorneys fly to Chicago and
interview Grand.
“I explained that we had this agreement and it was being paid back,” Grand said. “And they said they would finish their investigation and decide what to do.”
“The next thing I know is that I got a letter from the Department of Justice saying – you are being charged with a felony and we are going to seize your house, seize your
property, close your bank accounts and everything else.”
“At that point, I did get a lawyer.”
Had you ever been in trouble with the law before?
“No.”
And what was your thought?
“My thought was – this was a horrid mistake.”
Grand gets a lawyer.
“His advice was to plead guilty,” Grand said. “He felt very strongly that all that would happen would be probation. He felt that if we went to trial, it would be more
risky in terms of a longer sentence.”
Were you surprised by that advice?
“At that point, I was in absolute shock. I was – you are the lawyer – you tell me what to do because I haven’t a clue at this point.”
Grand pleads guilty. Federal Judge Mark Filip sentences Grand to four months in prison and two years probation. (Filip is now a partner at Kirkland & Ellis in Chicago.)
He’s sent to a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, where he’s mistakenly put in solitary for a couple of days. And not given access to his medication for a number of weeks – until his doctor threatened to sue the Bureau of Prisons.
He gets out of jail and starts to wonder about what happened.
He now works at a book store north of Chicago.
Looking back, would he have pled guilty?
“In my current state of mind, no,” he says.
“Had I been thinking about this, I would have gone to trial and pulled all of the EPA senior financial officers to testify as to how it happened,” Grand says.
“And my guess is the case would have been dropped.”
“Thinking back on it, given how embarrassing it would have been, calling all the top people, they would have dropped the case.”
“But I don’t know that. I’m speculating based on mulling this over for years.”
“The prosecutor’s name in this case was Julie Ruder. I believe she is still with the U.S. Attorney’s office in Chicago.”
Here is her quote from the transcript before the judge: “There is no allegation in this case that Grand caused the EPA to continue paying the overseas housing allowance.
Based on current information, the government believes the overpayments were the result of error on EPA’s part.”
Grand says that overpayment of the type that he went to jail for is widespread at the EPA.
Remember the supervisor who called Grand into his office to tell him that “someone” had called the IG on Grand? It was that supervisor who called the IG.
And Grand had run-ins with that same supervisor over overpayments to other staffers.
“The man who referred me to the IG – I had clashed with him before on overpayments to my staff,” Grand says. “It wasn’t pretty. And it was basically the same thing that
I went to jail for. I don’t know how widespread the problem is, but it isn’t just me.”
“When the new time and attendance tracking system was put in place, the union went to the regional administrator and forced an agreement that should any discrepancies be found in payments to EPA workers, there would be no disciplinary action against the workers.”
So why did you end up in jail?
“I don’t know,” Grand says.
“By the way, the union did come to my defense. One EPA union leader wrote a letter saying that ‘prosecuting Grand was like raising office politics to the level of blood
sport.’”
Grand says that since he was sent to jail for illegally receiving funds because of an admitted EPA mistake, higher ups at the EPA should go to jail for illegally
dispersing those funds.
He wants an investigation and prosecution.
“If this were investigated and the retaliation were proven, I think I would have a good case to go to the Justice Department and ask for a pardon.”
Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. He is also founder of singlepayeraction.org, and editor of the website Morgan County USA.
(NOTE: Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo is again in court with another witness coming forward on remarks made regarding the EPA's retaliation against her -- which should be considered a misuse of Federal funds and resources. Administrator Carole Browner was at the helm during the first case and Administrator Lisa Jackson is at the helm during this one.)
Where are the criminal prosecutions of the major corporations responsible for the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico? Still nowhere to be found. Where are the prosecutors? Where is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)? Not prosecuting major polluters.
Instead, what are they doing? Cracking down on whistleblowers. And those who support whistleblowers. While the corporate crooks are running free.
Next time you think of this disparity of justice, remember these two words: Jon Grand.
For more than twenty years, Grand was a senior administrator at the EPA in Chicago. Never had a run in with the law.
Then, he made the mistake of supporting an EPA whistleblower.
In 2000, Grand was talking on the phone with colleagues in Washington.
And the EPA people in Washington were making disparaging remarks about Marsha Coleman-Adebayo – a young African-American EPA staffer who was suing the EPA and its administrator –Carol Browner – for race and sex discrimination.
“They said they all had to be in Washington because ‘the Rosa Parks of the EPA’ was suing the administrator,” Grand told Corporate Crime Reporter in an interview
last week.
“They meant that Marsha was setting herself up as someone who she wasn’t – Rosa Parks,” Grand said. “She was trying to pretend she was a civil rights crusader – suing
people and so on. It was very derogatory.”
Grand had never heard of Coleman-Adebayo – or of her lawsuit.
But Coleman-Adebayo heard about the Rose Parks comment and asked Grand to fly to Washington and testify on her behalf at trial.
And Grand did. And it was a pivotal moment in the trial.
“I sensed that the jury was very aware of my being there – I was a bit startled by that,” Grand said. “And second, the fact that I was a high ranking manager coming in to refute the old boys club did in fact carry some weight.”
The jury returned a $600,000 verdict for Coleman-Adebayo – the largest such verdict in this type of case against the EPA. (NOTE: There is a $300,000 cap under the law, so it was automatically reduced)
How did the EPA respond to Grand’s testimony?
Retaliation.
First they refused to approve of the last $200,000 for a project he was working on.
Then, his colleagues in Washington, D.C. began to shun him.
“And I had occasion to go into Washington to meet with some people outside of the Office of International Activities,” Grand said. “But as I always did, I went over to see
if there was anything they needed out of the Region or they wanted me to do.”
“As I walked down the hall, door after door after door was closed on me.”
They were closed, or they were closing as you walked down the hall?
“They were closing.”
Like a movie?
“Yes,” Grand said. “It’s the old Amish game of shunning.”
But then, the EPA escalated its retaliation against Grand.
It’s a complicated story, but here it is in a nutshell.
From 1997 to 1999, Grand was assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Copenhagen, Denmark.
He was given a housing allowance of about $20,000 a year.
When he returned, the EPA kept giving him an additional $890 every paycheck – the housing allowance.
According to Grand, the EPA has a history of making these kinds of payroll mistakes.
In 2004, the EPA instituted a new “time and management system.”
Grand’s housing allowance was flagged.
“They talked to me about it,” Grand said. “And I said – yes, that’s what it looks like. I called the EPA Comptroller’s office in Washington. We set up a payment plan. And
they began taking the money out of my paycheck to repay it.”
Grand thought that was the end of it.
Nope.
“I was called into the Acting Deputy Regional Administrator’s Office and told that someone had called the EPA Inspector General about possible criminal charges,”
Grand said. “That was happening in the 2003 and 2004 time period.”
“I said – I thought we had that resolved.”
“He said – no, you are going to be put on administrative leave. And the IG will contact you.”
“I wasn’t overly concerned about it.”
They say criminal investigation and you are not overly concerned?
“Only because we had an agreement with the agency. And my view was if there was a problem, they would have not agreed to it.”
“But since we had a working agreement that was working smoothly, I thought – this is somebody trying to make trouble. Which happens.” IG attorneys fly to Chicago and
interview Grand.
“I explained that we had this agreement and it was being paid back,” Grand said. “And they said they would finish their investigation and decide what to do.”
“The next thing I know is that I got a letter from the Department of Justice saying – you are being charged with a felony and we are going to seize your house, seize your
property, close your bank accounts and everything else.”
“At that point, I did get a lawyer.”
Had you ever been in trouble with the law before?
“No.”
And what was your thought?
“My thought was – this was a horrid mistake.”
Grand gets a lawyer.
“His advice was to plead guilty,” Grand said. “He felt very strongly that all that would happen would be probation. He felt that if we went to trial, it would be more
risky in terms of a longer sentence.”
Were you surprised by that advice?
“At that point, I was in absolute shock. I was – you are the lawyer – you tell me what to do because I haven’t a clue at this point.”
Grand pleads guilty. Federal Judge Mark Filip sentences Grand to four months in prison and two years probation. (Filip is now a partner at Kirkland & Ellis in Chicago.)
He’s sent to a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, where he’s mistakenly put in solitary for a couple of days. And not given access to his medication for a number of weeks – until his doctor threatened to sue the Bureau of Prisons.
He gets out of jail and starts to wonder about what happened.
He now works at a book store north of Chicago.
Looking back, would he have pled guilty?
“In my current state of mind, no,” he says.
“Had I been thinking about this, I would have gone to trial and pulled all of the EPA senior financial officers to testify as to how it happened,” Grand says.
“And my guess is the case would have been dropped.”
“Thinking back on it, given how embarrassing it would have been, calling all the top people, they would have dropped the case.”
“But I don’t know that. I’m speculating based on mulling this over for years.”
“The prosecutor’s name in this case was Julie Ruder. I believe she is still with the U.S. Attorney’s office in Chicago.”
Here is her quote from the transcript before the judge: “There is no allegation in this case that Grand caused the EPA to continue paying the overseas housing allowance.
Based on current information, the government believes the overpayments were the result of error on EPA’s part.”
Grand says that overpayment of the type that he went to jail for is widespread at the EPA.
Remember the supervisor who called Grand into his office to tell him that “someone” had called the IG on Grand? It was that supervisor who called the IG.
And Grand had run-ins with that same supervisor over overpayments to other staffers.
“The man who referred me to the IG – I had clashed with him before on overpayments to my staff,” Grand says. “It wasn’t pretty. And it was basically the same thing that
I went to jail for. I don’t know how widespread the problem is, but it isn’t just me.”
“When the new time and attendance tracking system was put in place, the union went to the regional administrator and forced an agreement that should any discrepancies be found in payments to EPA workers, there would be no disciplinary action against the workers.”
So why did you end up in jail?
“I don’t know,” Grand says.
“By the way, the union did come to my defense. One EPA union leader wrote a letter saying that ‘prosecuting Grand was like raising office politics to the level of blood
sport.’”
Grand says that since he was sent to jail for illegally receiving funds because of an admitted EPA mistake, higher ups at the EPA should go to jail for illegally
dispersing those funds.
He wants an investigation and prosecution.
“If this were investigated and the retaliation were proven, I think I would have a good case to go to the Justice Department and ask for a pardon.”
Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. He is also founder of singlepayeraction.org, and editor of the website Morgan County USA.
(NOTE: Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo is again in court with another witness coming forward on remarks made regarding the EPA's retaliation against her -- which should be considered a misuse of Federal funds and resources. Administrator Carole Browner was at the helm during the first case and Administrator Lisa Jackson is at the helm during this one.)
Lisa P. Jackson's Rating Negative December 5, 2012
Be sure to go online at AOL and vote for or against President Obama's political appointees in his Cabinet. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson's rating is minus 123 with 272 dislikes and 149 likes so far.
Like Dislike: -123 Points
Likes 149 - Dislikes 272
Like Dislike: -123 Points
Likes 149 - Dislikes 272
Record $3.3 Billion Recovered because of Whistleblowers December 5, 2012
It's a shame that whistleblowers continue to suffer for protesting and exposing corruption in the Federal government, particularly since they save the taxpayers so much money from fraud and waste. President Obama just signed the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) into law, but there was not a whistleblower in sight at the signing ceremony. Was that a message being sent from his office? Administrator Lisa Jackson ignored findings by the Office of Special Counsel against the EPA for retaliating against employees who blew the whistle on violations and many other agencies have gone after whistleblowers during this administrations first four years. We need better protection if employees are going to continue to stick their necks out when they are aware that they will be cut off at the first opportunity by those without the integrity and honor to do the right thing. The following article shows how much some whistleblowers can save the taxpayers from corrupt employees.
WPBF-TV updated 12/4/2012 10:18:04 PM ET2012-12-05T03:18:04
Whistleblower tips led to a record $3.3 billion recovered by the Justice Department this past year in cases involving fraud against the government, officials said Tuesday.
Such cases were brought under the False Claims Act, a law covering frauds against the government that includes a provision allowing private citizens to file lawsuits on the government's behalf. These citizens are then entitled to collect a portion of any fines or penalties collected in their cases.
Overall, the government recovered nearly $5 billion in False Claims Act cases for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, including $3 billion stemming from health care fraud and $911 million paid by mortgage servicers as part of the $26 billion foreclosure settlement, the Justice Department said. The previous record for False Claims Act recoveries was $3.2 billion in the prior fiscal year.
"The False Claims Act is, quite simply, the most powerful tool that we have to deter and redress fraud," Acting Associate Attorney General Tony West said.
The biggest single case for 2012 involved pharmaceutical firm GlaxoSmithKline, which paid $1.5 billion to resolve False Claims Act allegations. The company was accused of promoting drugs for uses other than those approved by the Food and Drug Administration, making false statements about drug safety and underpaying Medicaid rebates. The $1.5 billion payment came as part of a $3 billion settlement concerning the drug maker's practices.
In the GlaxoSmithKline case, "multiple" whistleblowers received awards totaling $131 million, the Justice Department said. In the foreclosure settlement, six whistleblowers received $46.5 million in total. Overall, whistleblowers received $439 million in Justice Department cases in the 2012 fiscal year.
Stephen Kohn, executive director of the National Whistleblower Center, said the increase in whistleblower-driven recoveries was the result of increased public awareness. The Securities and Exchange Commission, he noted, rolled out its own whistleblower program last year, while the IRS paid out $104 million earlier this year to a former UBS banker who exposed tax fraud by the bank's clients. Kohn represented that banker, Bradley Birkenfeld, whose reward is believed to be the largest in U.S. history.
"People are seeing that whistleblowers can win, they can land on their feet, and that the concept of the government paying a large monetary reward is not 'pie in the sky,'" Kohn said.
WPBF-TV updated 12/4/2012 10:18:04 PM ET2012-12-05T03:18:04
Whistleblower tips led to a record $3.3 billion recovered by the Justice Department this past year in cases involving fraud against the government, officials said Tuesday.
Such cases were brought under the False Claims Act, a law covering frauds against the government that includes a provision allowing private citizens to file lawsuits on the government's behalf. These citizens are then entitled to collect a portion of any fines or penalties collected in their cases.
Overall, the government recovered nearly $5 billion in False Claims Act cases for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, including $3 billion stemming from health care fraud and $911 million paid by mortgage servicers as part of the $26 billion foreclosure settlement, the Justice Department said. The previous record for False Claims Act recoveries was $3.2 billion in the prior fiscal year.
"The False Claims Act is, quite simply, the most powerful tool that we have to deter and redress fraud," Acting Associate Attorney General Tony West said.
The biggest single case for 2012 involved pharmaceutical firm GlaxoSmithKline, which paid $1.5 billion to resolve False Claims Act allegations. The company was accused of promoting drugs for uses other than those approved by the Food and Drug Administration, making false statements about drug safety and underpaying Medicaid rebates. The $1.5 billion payment came as part of a $3 billion settlement concerning the drug maker's practices.
In the GlaxoSmithKline case, "multiple" whistleblowers received awards totaling $131 million, the Justice Department said. In the foreclosure settlement, six whistleblowers received $46.5 million in total. Overall, whistleblowers received $439 million in Justice Department cases in the 2012 fiscal year.
Stephen Kohn, executive director of the National Whistleblower Center, said the increase in whistleblower-driven recoveries was the result of increased public awareness. The Securities and Exchange Commission, he noted, rolled out its own whistleblower program last year, while the IRS paid out $104 million earlier this year to a former UBS banker who exposed tax fraud by the bank's clients. Kohn represented that banker, Bradley Birkenfeld, whose reward is believed to be the largest in U.S. history.
"People are seeing that whistleblowers can win, they can land on their feet, and that the concept of the government paying a large monetary reward is not 'pie in the sky,'" Kohn said.
Feds file discrimination complaint against Forest Service
Tuesday - 12/3/2013, 5:00am EST By Jolie Lee Federal News Radio
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is tackling a history of discrimination with more training and accountability as part of a cultural transformation program. But some current and former USDA employees say they're not seeing cultural changes, and sex discrimination is still prominent within the agency. Specifically, female employees in Region 5 of the Forest Service are objecting to the disparity between how men and women are hired and promoted. The employees also point to hostile workplace conditions where, in some cases, they say they experienced egregious sexual harassment. "We want to see more women get the opportunities they deserve, getting
promotions ... getting jobs and getting paid for their skills and their experience level commensurate to the men," said Elaine Vercruysse, a logging systems planner with the Plumas National Forest in an exclusive interview with Federal News Radio. Vercruysse filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
on behalf of all women in Region 5, which is in California. In all, Region 5 has about 5,000 employees, of which 1,500 (or about 30 percent) are women, Vercruysse said.
In contrast, the federal workforce is 44 percent female. "[This discrepancy] I'm sure will give everybody a sense of pause because that number's meaningful," said Debra Roth, partner at Shaw Bransford & Roth, and host of the FEDtalk show on Federal News Radio. What's more, Vercruysse said, women are not given promotions, even while less qualified men are promoted over them. Vercruysse has worked for the Forest Service for 25 years. She said her last promotion was 22 years ago and she's
actively sought a promotion for the last nine years, "with no success."
“We want to see more women get the opportunities they deserve, getting promotions ... getting jobs and getting paid for their skills and their experience level commensurate to the men.” — Elaine Vercruysse, Forest Service employee
"I see men coming in with their first appointment, and within three years, they're getting into leadership or key positions in the organization. I've been watching it over and over and over again," she said. In an emailed response, USDA stated, "We are aware of the employees' concerns and take them very seriously, as we do all allegations of misconduct. The allegations have already been or are being fully and fairly investigated. It is the policy of the USDA and the Forest Service to provide a workplace that is free of harassment."
The EEOC must first certify Vercruysse's complaint as a class complaint, a process that could take a few years, she said. To get certified as a class, a plaintiff must show four factors, Roth said. First, the plaintiff must show enough people are involved where it would be impractical for the EEOC to process them individually — although there is "no magic number," Roth said. "Usually, 10 or 12 isn't enough. But when you read [Vercruysse's] informal complaint, you get the sense that there's a whole lot more than that," Roth said. The plaintiff must also show the facts of the plaintiffs' claims are common to each other, as well as a pattern that the claim of discrimination is
typical for all class members. Lastly, the plaintiff, also known as the class agent, also must show he or she will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
The Vercruysse claim is now at the discovery phase. Vercruysse said the objective of filing the complaint is not monetary but cultural — to change the policies and procedures in Region 5. She said USDA offered her money to settle her complaint but she did not take it. She said she could not disclose to Federal News Radio the amount she was offered because she had signed a non-disclosure agreement with the agency. Vercruysse said she would have dropped the complaint completely had USDA been willing to sit down and discuss how to address her concerns. She said the agency's unwillingness to do so led to the filing of the class action suit.
Cultural transformation
(“We're adroitly addressing civil rights training throughout [the agency].” — Joe Leonard, USDA Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
USDA's cultural transformation includes more training for employees to become "sensitive to people of all races, in all regions of the country," more accountability when discrimination claims are made and a harder look at metrics, said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in an October interview with Federal News Radio, unrelated to this case. Vilsack spoke mainly about fighting discrimination against farmers, but said the changes encompass inclusivity in USDA's own workforce. One sign of that change has been findings of discrimination in some agencies within USDA where there had never been findings before, said Joe Leonard, USDA assistant secretary for civil rights. "It's not so much we're having these findings to have them. We're adroitly addressing civil rights training throughout [the agency]. I've gone to Region 5 four or five times. We've had findings in the Forest Service. We've had findings in Region 5," Leonard said. Leonard referred any specific questions about discrimination in the workforce to the Office of Human Resources Management. Federal News Radio emailed those questions to USDA, including how USDA ensures women are being promoted on an equal basis with men. The USDA did not address Federal News Radio's specific questions but acknowledged that cases of discrimination had been and were being investigated. Leonard pointed out that USDA had the lowest number of EEO complaints in the past few years since the agency has been keeping track of these complaints.
EEO complaints hit a low of 478 complaints in fiscal 2010 and in the last two years saw more than 500 complaints per year, according to EEOC data posted on USDA's
website. Both the Government Accountability Office and the USDA's Office of the Inspector General have noted USDA's improvements in handling civil rights abuses. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights — Leonard's office — had "significantly improved its monitoring of settlement agreements and closure of program
complaints," according to the August 2012 IG report. But the report added that the office needed to continue to "emphasize that formalized processes and controls are necessary," the report said.
Transformation working?
But the USDA leadership's stated commitment to fight discrimination has met skepticism from some USDA women who said they have experienced discrimination and harassment at work but have yet to see any change in the workplace culture. "See, what they do is, once we come forward and make a complaint, instead of addressing the complaint, they decide to make a cultural transformation. There's no cultural transformation whatsoever. It's smoke and mirrors," said Jonel Wagoner, a fire training officer with the Sequoia National Forest in an interview with Federal News Radio. Wagoner, who has been with the Forest Service for 33 years, said she has moved six times and taken four demotions in her career. Wagoner filed an EEO complaint on Sept. 21, claiming she suffered from negative comments by her forest supervisor about her character and work, was forced out of her union steward position and was denied fire assignment opportunities — all in retaliation for speaking up against civil rights abuses and for participating in the Vercruysse class complaint. Alicia Dabney said this kind of retaliation has a chilling effect on other women speaking up. Dabney said she lost her job as a firefighter for speaking up against sexual and racial jokes made about her — including a lewd voicemail left by a coworker and papers scattered around the workplace with "Alicia Dabney is a whore" printed on them —and even an attempted rape by her supervisor. In 2011, while on an assignment, Dabney said her supervisor put her in a chokehold. "I had to talk him down ... from whatever he had planned in his mind. The way I felt, I felt like he was going to try to rape me, but I don't know what he was thinking besides telling me, I want to cuddle with you, I want to do this," Dabney said. "I was like, No, you're my boss. Please let me go."
Dabney said she immediately went to a higher supervisor, who said he would handle it. Nothing happened, Dabney said. To this day, the supervisor who put Dabney in a chokehold is still working for the Forest Service. But Dabney is not. The agency claimed she lied on her job application. Dabney has a felony for welfare fraud, which she reported on her application. But the Forest Service said Dabney did not report a vandalism misdemeanor. Dabney claimed she did include the documentation on the misdemeanor and the agency's argument is that she did not write on the front of her application she had a misdemeanor.
“I worked super hard through all of the harassment and discrimination and everything that they threw at me.” — Alicia Dabney, former Forest Service employee
"How can Homeland Security clear me and ... then all of a sudden I'm going to lie on my background? You're going to wait three years and then fire me?" Dabney said.
Dabney has filed a complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board. Despite all that's happened to her, Dabney said she still wants her job back as a firefighter.
"I worked super hard through all of the harassment and discrimination and everything that they threw at me," she said. Dabney added, "Whatever comes along with that job, maybe it's the way that it has to be. ... Maybe I had to go through all of that, so they can't ever do it again to more people."
Elise Lopez's story parallels Dabney's in that she was the only female firefighter when she worked for the El Dorado National Forest. She said she also faced discrimination from coworkers and supervisors. Lopez said her supervisor "was making comments toward me about how women shouldn't be firefighters with the Forest Service." The harassment turned physical one day when the fire crew was practicing how to build barriers for a fire. Lopez's supervisor walked up behind her and pushed her to the ground. He then held her on the ground with his foot, she said. "I was there for a couple of seconds, tried to get up," Lopez said. "One of the other firefighters stood up and said something." Lopez, who had served in the Navy, said she never had this problem when she was in the service. Lopez is now in a different forest, a "much better place," she said. But she said the fight against discrimination is "ongoing." "Even though Secretary Vilsack is saying there's a ... cultural transformation, there's not enough being done," Lopez said. "They're not holding these supervisors and fire managers accountable for what they're letting happen in their forests."
Troubled history
If Vercruysse's complaint is certified as a class complaint, it will be the third class complaint filed against Region 5 in the last three decades. The Bernardi consent decree
of 1981 required the Forest Service to hire the same proportion of women into the workforce as existed in the civilian workforce. Under the decree, women had to make up 43 percent of the Forest Service workforce over the five years. The agency also had to increase the number of women at the GS-11 through GS-13 pay grades. The EEO class complaint was filed nearly a decade earlier by Gene Bernardi, a research sociologist. Although seemingly a win for women at the Forest Service, the consent decree
had an unintended consequence — breeding resentment among some male employees. "The majority of women were highly qualified and able to do their jobs. They
were sabotaged because the men didn't want them there. Men had been promised those positions for years," said Lesa Donnelly, who participated in the Bernardi class complaint. "I hate to use the words 'good ol' boy system,' but that's what it was." In 1994, Donnelly filed a class complaint based on the backlash women hired under Bernardi had suffered. The terms of the settlement ran from 2000 to 2006 and pertained to setting up processes for investigations, employee trainings and accountability for retaliation against women, as well as a mentoring program for women and an annual women's conference. After 2006, however, conditions for women back-slided, Donnelly said. By the time Vilsack took office in 2009, "things were at the level they were during Bernardi with women not getting hired and ... the level they were in 1994 as far as harassment, discrimination and workplace assaults and violence and sexual harassment," Donnelly said. Donnelly is now the vice president of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees and she represents several women, including Vercruysse, who have filed EEOC complaints against the Forest Service. If the EEOC does not certify Vercruysse's complaint as a class complaint, Donnelly said they will have exhausted the administrative process and will then file a case in federal court. The hope, though, is not to go to court but to "sit down and come to an agreement."
In federal discrimination claims, the plaintiff must first exhaust the informal internal process and then the EEOC process before going to federal court. If the EEOC does not certify Vercruysse's claim as a class complaint, the women will then take the case to federal court, Donnelly said. Donnelly faults the Forest Service for not negotiating with the women and thereby wasting "hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars by digging their heels and going through this [EEOC] process."
"We would like to sit down with them and work together," Donnelly said. "We're not going to say we have all the answers, but we would like to work together and collaborate on some of these processes and procedures we can change or we can put into place to make it a level playing field."
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is tackling a history of discrimination with more training and accountability as part of a cultural transformation program. But some current and former USDA employees say they're not seeing cultural changes, and sex discrimination is still prominent within the agency. Specifically, female employees in Region 5 of the Forest Service are objecting to the disparity between how men and women are hired and promoted. The employees also point to hostile workplace conditions where, in some cases, they say they experienced egregious sexual harassment. "We want to see more women get the opportunities they deserve, getting
promotions ... getting jobs and getting paid for their skills and their experience level commensurate to the men," said Elaine Vercruysse, a logging systems planner with the Plumas National Forest in an exclusive interview with Federal News Radio. Vercruysse filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
on behalf of all women in Region 5, which is in California. In all, Region 5 has about 5,000 employees, of which 1,500 (or about 30 percent) are women, Vercruysse said.
In contrast, the federal workforce is 44 percent female. "[This discrepancy] I'm sure will give everybody a sense of pause because that number's meaningful," said Debra Roth, partner at Shaw Bransford & Roth, and host of the FEDtalk show on Federal News Radio. What's more, Vercruysse said, women are not given promotions, even while less qualified men are promoted over them. Vercruysse has worked for the Forest Service for 25 years. She said her last promotion was 22 years ago and she's
actively sought a promotion for the last nine years, "with no success."
“We want to see more women get the opportunities they deserve, getting promotions ... getting jobs and getting paid for their skills and their experience level commensurate to the men.” — Elaine Vercruysse, Forest Service employee
"I see men coming in with their first appointment, and within three years, they're getting into leadership or key positions in the organization. I've been watching it over and over and over again," she said. In an emailed response, USDA stated, "We are aware of the employees' concerns and take them very seriously, as we do all allegations of misconduct. The allegations have already been or are being fully and fairly investigated. It is the policy of the USDA and the Forest Service to provide a workplace that is free of harassment."
The EEOC must first certify Vercruysse's complaint as a class complaint, a process that could take a few years, she said. To get certified as a class, a plaintiff must show four factors, Roth said. First, the plaintiff must show enough people are involved where it would be impractical for the EEOC to process them individually — although there is "no magic number," Roth said. "Usually, 10 or 12 isn't enough. But when you read [Vercruysse's] informal complaint, you get the sense that there's a whole lot more than that," Roth said. The plaintiff must also show the facts of the plaintiffs' claims are common to each other, as well as a pattern that the claim of discrimination is
typical for all class members. Lastly, the plaintiff, also known as the class agent, also must show he or she will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
The Vercruysse claim is now at the discovery phase. Vercruysse said the objective of filing the complaint is not monetary but cultural — to change the policies and procedures in Region 5. She said USDA offered her money to settle her complaint but she did not take it. She said she could not disclose to Federal News Radio the amount she was offered because she had signed a non-disclosure agreement with the agency. Vercruysse said she would have dropped the complaint completely had USDA been willing to sit down and discuss how to address her concerns. She said the agency's unwillingness to do so led to the filing of the class action suit.
Cultural transformation
(“We're adroitly addressing civil rights training throughout [the agency].” — Joe Leonard, USDA Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
USDA's cultural transformation includes more training for employees to become "sensitive to people of all races, in all regions of the country," more accountability when discrimination claims are made and a harder look at metrics, said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in an October interview with Federal News Radio, unrelated to this case. Vilsack spoke mainly about fighting discrimination against farmers, but said the changes encompass inclusivity in USDA's own workforce. One sign of that change has been findings of discrimination in some agencies within USDA where there had never been findings before, said Joe Leonard, USDA assistant secretary for civil rights. "It's not so much we're having these findings to have them. We're adroitly addressing civil rights training throughout [the agency]. I've gone to Region 5 four or five times. We've had findings in the Forest Service. We've had findings in Region 5," Leonard said. Leonard referred any specific questions about discrimination in the workforce to the Office of Human Resources Management. Federal News Radio emailed those questions to USDA, including how USDA ensures women are being promoted on an equal basis with men. The USDA did not address Federal News Radio's specific questions but acknowledged that cases of discrimination had been and were being investigated. Leonard pointed out that USDA had the lowest number of EEO complaints in the past few years since the agency has been keeping track of these complaints.
EEO complaints hit a low of 478 complaints in fiscal 2010 and in the last two years saw more than 500 complaints per year, according to EEOC data posted on USDA's
website. Both the Government Accountability Office and the USDA's Office of the Inspector General have noted USDA's improvements in handling civil rights abuses. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights — Leonard's office — had "significantly improved its monitoring of settlement agreements and closure of program
complaints," according to the August 2012 IG report. But the report added that the office needed to continue to "emphasize that formalized processes and controls are necessary," the report said.
Transformation working?
But the USDA leadership's stated commitment to fight discrimination has met skepticism from some USDA women who said they have experienced discrimination and harassment at work but have yet to see any change in the workplace culture. "See, what they do is, once we come forward and make a complaint, instead of addressing the complaint, they decide to make a cultural transformation. There's no cultural transformation whatsoever. It's smoke and mirrors," said Jonel Wagoner, a fire training officer with the Sequoia National Forest in an interview with Federal News Radio. Wagoner, who has been with the Forest Service for 33 years, said she has moved six times and taken four demotions in her career. Wagoner filed an EEO complaint on Sept. 21, claiming she suffered from negative comments by her forest supervisor about her character and work, was forced out of her union steward position and was denied fire assignment opportunities — all in retaliation for speaking up against civil rights abuses and for participating in the Vercruysse class complaint. Alicia Dabney said this kind of retaliation has a chilling effect on other women speaking up. Dabney said she lost her job as a firefighter for speaking up against sexual and racial jokes made about her — including a lewd voicemail left by a coworker and papers scattered around the workplace with "Alicia Dabney is a whore" printed on them —and even an attempted rape by her supervisor. In 2011, while on an assignment, Dabney said her supervisor put her in a chokehold. "I had to talk him down ... from whatever he had planned in his mind. The way I felt, I felt like he was going to try to rape me, but I don't know what he was thinking besides telling me, I want to cuddle with you, I want to do this," Dabney said. "I was like, No, you're my boss. Please let me go."
Dabney said she immediately went to a higher supervisor, who said he would handle it. Nothing happened, Dabney said. To this day, the supervisor who put Dabney in a chokehold is still working for the Forest Service. But Dabney is not. The agency claimed she lied on her job application. Dabney has a felony for welfare fraud, which she reported on her application. But the Forest Service said Dabney did not report a vandalism misdemeanor. Dabney claimed she did include the documentation on the misdemeanor and the agency's argument is that she did not write on the front of her application she had a misdemeanor.
“I worked super hard through all of the harassment and discrimination and everything that they threw at me.” — Alicia Dabney, former Forest Service employee
"How can Homeland Security clear me and ... then all of a sudden I'm going to lie on my background? You're going to wait three years and then fire me?" Dabney said.
Dabney has filed a complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board. Despite all that's happened to her, Dabney said she still wants her job back as a firefighter.
"I worked super hard through all of the harassment and discrimination and everything that they threw at me," she said. Dabney added, "Whatever comes along with that job, maybe it's the way that it has to be. ... Maybe I had to go through all of that, so they can't ever do it again to more people."
Elise Lopez's story parallels Dabney's in that she was the only female firefighter when she worked for the El Dorado National Forest. She said she also faced discrimination from coworkers and supervisors. Lopez said her supervisor "was making comments toward me about how women shouldn't be firefighters with the Forest Service." The harassment turned physical one day when the fire crew was practicing how to build barriers for a fire. Lopez's supervisor walked up behind her and pushed her to the ground. He then held her on the ground with his foot, she said. "I was there for a couple of seconds, tried to get up," Lopez said. "One of the other firefighters stood up and said something." Lopez, who had served in the Navy, said she never had this problem when she was in the service. Lopez is now in a different forest, a "much better place," she said. But she said the fight against discrimination is "ongoing." "Even though Secretary Vilsack is saying there's a ... cultural transformation, there's not enough being done," Lopez said. "They're not holding these supervisors and fire managers accountable for what they're letting happen in their forests."
Troubled history
If Vercruysse's complaint is certified as a class complaint, it will be the third class complaint filed against Region 5 in the last three decades. The Bernardi consent decree
of 1981 required the Forest Service to hire the same proportion of women into the workforce as existed in the civilian workforce. Under the decree, women had to make up 43 percent of the Forest Service workforce over the five years. The agency also had to increase the number of women at the GS-11 through GS-13 pay grades. The EEO class complaint was filed nearly a decade earlier by Gene Bernardi, a research sociologist. Although seemingly a win for women at the Forest Service, the consent decree
had an unintended consequence — breeding resentment among some male employees. "The majority of women were highly qualified and able to do their jobs. They
were sabotaged because the men didn't want them there. Men had been promised those positions for years," said Lesa Donnelly, who participated in the Bernardi class complaint. "I hate to use the words 'good ol' boy system,' but that's what it was." In 1994, Donnelly filed a class complaint based on the backlash women hired under Bernardi had suffered. The terms of the settlement ran from 2000 to 2006 and pertained to setting up processes for investigations, employee trainings and accountability for retaliation against women, as well as a mentoring program for women and an annual women's conference. After 2006, however, conditions for women back-slided, Donnelly said. By the time Vilsack took office in 2009, "things were at the level they were during Bernardi with women not getting hired and ... the level they were in 1994 as far as harassment, discrimination and workplace assaults and violence and sexual harassment," Donnelly said. Donnelly is now the vice president of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees and she represents several women, including Vercruysse, who have filed EEOC complaints against the Forest Service. If the EEOC does not certify Vercruysse's complaint as a class complaint, Donnelly said they will have exhausted the administrative process and will then file a case in federal court. The hope, though, is not to go to court but to "sit down and come to an agreement."
In federal discrimination claims, the plaintiff must first exhaust the informal internal process and then the EEOC process before going to federal court. If the EEOC does not certify Vercruysse's claim as a class complaint, the women will then take the case to federal court, Donnelly said. Donnelly faults the Forest Service for not negotiating with the women and thereby wasting "hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars by digging their heels and going through this [EEOC] process."
"We would like to sit down with them and work together," Donnelly said. "We're not going to say we have all the answers, but we would like to work together and collaborate on some of these processes and procedures we can change or we can put into place to make it a level playing field."
OSC Granted Stay in Challenge to Commerce Department Gag Clauses
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Ann O’Hanlon,
(202) 254-3631; aohanlon@osc.gov
WASHINGTON, D.C./November 30, 2012 –
The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) yesterday granted a stay requested by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) prohibiting enforcement of unlawful gag clauses in settlement agreements between the Commerce Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) and four former employees of the OIG, each of whom was coerced into signing an agreement under threat of harm to their career prospects and future employment. The order is available at http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=777076&version=779997&application=ACROBAT. The agreements prohibit employees from voluntarily communicating with OSC or Congress. The employees were told that manufactured negative performance appraisals would be shared with prospective employers if the employees did not sign the nondisclosure agreements.
The MSPB’s action means that the personnel actions taken or threatened to be taken by OIG senior management must cease for 45 days, giving OSC further time to investigate the allegations. These personnel actions include the threatened communication with prospective employers and the imposition of significant changes in the employees’ working conditions. The order concludes that an agreement restricting employees' ability to report wrongdoing is a change in working conditions and is therefore a personnel action under the Whistleblower Protection Act. In addition, the order applies the Lloyd-LaFollette Act, a 1912 law codifying the rights of federal employees to blow the whistle to Congress.
Because the act of disclosing the gag provision may itself be prohibited by the harsh terms of the agreements, OSC is protecting the employees’ identities. “OSC is committed to ensuring that agencies do not interfere with whistleblowing to Congress,” said Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner. “We are pleased that the MSPB has granted the stay so that OSC can further investigate this matter.”
***
CONTACT: Ann O’Hanlon,
(202) 254-3631; aohanlon@osc.gov
WASHINGTON, D.C./November 30, 2012 –
The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) yesterday granted a stay requested by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) prohibiting enforcement of unlawful gag clauses in settlement agreements between the Commerce Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) and four former employees of the OIG, each of whom was coerced into signing an agreement under threat of harm to their career prospects and future employment. The order is available at http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=777076&version=779997&application=ACROBAT. The agreements prohibit employees from voluntarily communicating with OSC or Congress. The employees were told that manufactured negative performance appraisals would be shared with prospective employers if the employees did not sign the nondisclosure agreements.
The MSPB’s action means that the personnel actions taken or threatened to be taken by OIG senior management must cease for 45 days, giving OSC further time to investigate the allegations. These personnel actions include the threatened communication with prospective employers and the imposition of significant changes in the employees’ working conditions. The order concludes that an agreement restricting employees' ability to report wrongdoing is a change in working conditions and is therefore a personnel action under the Whistleblower Protection Act. In addition, the order applies the Lloyd-LaFollette Act, a 1912 law codifying the rights of federal employees to blow the whistle to Congress.
Because the act of disclosing the gag provision may itself be prohibited by the harsh terms of the agreements, OSC is protecting the employees’ identities. “OSC is committed to ensuring that agencies do not interfere with whistleblowing to Congress,” said Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner. “We are pleased that the MSPB has granted the stay so that OSC can further investigate this matter.”
***
SCUTTLEBUTT has it that Jackson wants to run for Lautenberg's Seat in NJ November 25, 2012
EPA Administrator Jackson is supposed to be on her way out, leaving for New Jersey. Rumor has it that she is going to prepare for Lautenberg's Senatorial seat in NJ - so she will be resting up to get ready! Watch as the departing political appointees, many who have watched while others were damaged under their leadership and put out to pasture, think of their own future employment as coat-tail winners in the Obama re-election.
US Department of Labor's OSHA announces new Whistleblower Protection Program director
November 20, 2012
WASHINGTON – Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels today announced Beth Slavet as the new director of the agency's Whistleblower Protection Program.
Slavet is an experienced administrator and manager with more than 30 years of experience with the enforcement of federal whistleblower statutes. She is the former chairman of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, where she also served as vice chairman and a member from 1995-2003. She has spent the last decade in private practice where she had a special focus on whistleblower protection.
OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and 21 other statutes protecting employees who report alleged violations of various workplace, commercial motor vehicle, airline, nuclear, pipeline, environmental, railroad, public transportation, maritime, consumer product, health care reform, corporate securities, food safety and consumer financial reform regulations. Additional information is available at http://www.whistleblowers.gov.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA's role is to ensure these conditions for America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov. Keith Wrightson, Worker Safety & Health Advocate, Public Citizen's Congress Watch, 215 Pennsylvania Ave., SE Washington, D.C. 20003 T: (202) 454-5139 C: (508) 736-5522; Contact: Office of Communications Phone: 202-693-1999
WASHINGTON – Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels today announced Beth Slavet as the new director of the agency's Whistleblower Protection Program.
Slavet is an experienced administrator and manager with more than 30 years of experience with the enforcement of federal whistleblower statutes. She is the former chairman of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, where she also served as vice chairman and a member from 1995-2003. She has spent the last decade in private practice where she had a special focus on whistleblower protection.
OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and 21 other statutes protecting employees who report alleged violations of various workplace, commercial motor vehicle, airline, nuclear, pipeline, environmental, railroad, public transportation, maritime, consumer product, health care reform, corporate securities, food safety and consumer financial reform regulations. Additional information is available at http://www.whistleblowers.gov.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA's role is to ensure these conditions for America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov. Keith Wrightson, Worker Safety & Health Advocate, Public Citizen's Congress Watch, 215 Pennsylvania Ave., SE Washington, D.C. 20003 T: (202) 454-5139 C: (508) 736-5522; Contact: Office of Communications Phone: 202-693-1999
They're On Their Way OUT!!! November 19, 2012
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson sent an "All Hands" memo to employees stating that it was with "mixed emotions that I announce EPA General Counsel Scott Fulton's impending departure from EPA effective January 13, 2013."
She goes on to thank Fulton for his "unwavering good humor" and his 30-year government career that began at the Department of Justice in 1982.
Following his departure, Jackson said that Principal Deputy General Counsel Brenda Mallory will serve as acting general counsel, who will be joined by Deputy General Counsels Avi Garbow and Bicky Corman, who "will together provide outstanding leadership in the coming months."
She goes on to thank Fulton for his "unwavering good humor" and his 30-year government career that began at the Department of Justice in 1982.
Following his departure, Jackson said that Principal Deputy General Counsel Brenda Mallory will serve as acting general counsel, who will be joined by Deputy General Counsels Avi Garbow and Bicky Corman, who "will together provide outstanding leadership in the coming months."
GOP accuses EPA chief of using secret email November 19, 2012
Republican House members
want to know if EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is using pseudonyms.
| AP Photo
Republican House members want to know if EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is using pseudonyms. | AP Photo Close
By ELIZA KRIGMAN | 11/16/12 4:57 PM EST
Republican leaders of the House Science Committee want to know if EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is using private email addresses or psuedonyms to conduct official business in an effort to dodge public scrutiny. Lawmakers are citing a recent Daily Caller story alleging that Jackson has used “alias email accounts,” including one under the name “Richard Windsor.”
“This reported incident follows similarly secretive and highly questionable methods of communication by senior officials at science agencies within the White House, Department of Commerce (DOC), and Department of Energy (DOE),” the Republicans said in a news release. Committee Chairman Ralph Hall and five other Republicans on the panel sent letters Friday to the EPA, the White House and other agencies. The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
Earlier this year, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee raised red flags after learning that an Energy Department employee had used a Gmail account to send confidential information to a company that went on to get a $1.4 billion partial loan guarantee.
Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa complained in July that for some officials, “Gmail or Hotmail was a convenient way to be out of the limelight, if you will, or accountability.” But another former DOE official, Jonathan Silver, said it was simply a matter of convenience — that when working outside the office, his government-issued BlackBerry was “so cumbersome that it’s virtually impossible to work with documents and long-form pieces.”
In September, the Competitive Enterprise Institute sued EPA to demand the release of emails from “‘secondary,' nonpublic email accounts for EPA administrators.” It cited a 2008 memo in which an agency official told the National Archives and Records Administration that the accounts had begun under Clinton-era EPA chief Carol
Browner. “Few EPA staff members, usually only high-level senior staff, even know that these accounts exist,” the EPA official wrote in the memo. The Daily Caller story cites a book by a CEI fellow as its source for the “Richard Windsor” claim. The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
Under federal law, use of private emails for official business is prohibited, unless measures have been taken to ensure that such communication is archived
appropriately.
Friday’s letters, sent to Jackson, White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler and the inspectors general of the EPA, the Commerce Department and the Energy
Department, request a review of how the agencies are complying with communication laws and abiding by President Barack Obama’s transparency pledge.
Erica Martinson contributed to this report. This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 2:23 p.m. on November 16, 2012
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83990.html#ixzz2CgU5o0fo
By ELIZA KRIGMAN | 11/16/12 4:57 PM EST
Republican leaders of the House Science Committee want to know if EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is using private email addresses or psuedonyms to conduct official business in an effort to dodge public scrutiny. Lawmakers are citing a recent Daily Caller story alleging that Jackson has used “alias email accounts,” including one under the name “Richard Windsor.”
“This reported incident follows similarly secretive and highly questionable methods of communication by senior officials at science agencies within the White House, Department of Commerce (DOC), and Department of Energy (DOE),” the Republicans said in a news release. Committee Chairman Ralph Hall and five other Republicans on the panel sent letters Friday to the EPA, the White House and other agencies. The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
Earlier this year, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee raised red flags after learning that an Energy Department employee had used a Gmail account to send confidential information to a company that went on to get a $1.4 billion partial loan guarantee.
Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa complained in July that for some officials, “Gmail or Hotmail was a convenient way to be out of the limelight, if you will, or accountability.” But another former DOE official, Jonathan Silver, said it was simply a matter of convenience — that when working outside the office, his government-issued BlackBerry was “so cumbersome that it’s virtually impossible to work with documents and long-form pieces.”
In September, the Competitive Enterprise Institute sued EPA to demand the release of emails from “‘secondary,' nonpublic email accounts for EPA administrators.” It cited a 2008 memo in which an agency official told the National Archives and Records Administration that the accounts had begun under Clinton-era EPA chief Carol
Browner. “Few EPA staff members, usually only high-level senior staff, even know that these accounts exist,” the EPA official wrote in the memo. The Daily Caller story cites a book by a CEI fellow as its source for the “Richard Windsor” claim. The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
Under federal law, use of private emails for official business is prohibited, unless measures have been taken to ensure that such communication is archived
appropriately.
Friday’s letters, sent to Jackson, White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler and the inspectors general of the EPA, the Commerce Department and the Energy
Department, request a review of how the agencies are complying with communication laws and abiding by President Barack Obama’s transparency pledge.
Erica Martinson contributed to this report. This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 2:23 p.m. on November 16, 2012
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83990.html#ixzz2CgU5o0fo
New Jersey???
Governor of New Jersey, the well-liked Big Man, Chris Christie, was out there when he called the President to assist with the damage done to his State after Hurricane Sandy, garnering criticism from his party for adding to Obama's popularity right before the election. Now, rumor has it that President Obama's selection to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, is on her way back to NJ after four years of the Washington heat, after having previously served there under former Governor Corzine as his Chief of Staff. Jackson was a supporter of Senator Hillary Clinton during the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries, so she will probably positioning herself again if the Secretary of State, who has also said she is stepping down, does decide to run in the next Presidental election. )See article below on Jackson's possible move.)
As a New Jersey native and major supporter of Hillary Clinton, having written an article when she was the First Lady in my publication "Women's International Network News" (WINews) in 1993, it is unbelievable to me that Ms. Jackson would allow the EPA to be part of the "War on Women" that included me and my staff, while supporting many of the people who continue to make EPA a scary place to work. Her political acumen did not appear to extend to many employees within the agency, particularly the whistleblowers and complainants who were trying to get her to clean up a totally unhealthy and often hostile work environment. She definitely owes an apology to those hardworking, productive, and dedicated public servants she allowed her management to destroy while she was in a position to take appropriate action. We would be happy to provide her, and the President's other political appointees, with a long list of highly professional women and men who should not only receive apologies, but full relief from the retaliation and harassment they endured for attempting to do their jobs for him and the country, often while we observed others violating the laws, misusing government funds, and abusing their authority.
Listed below are those who signed the October 2012 "Open Letter to the President - War on Women at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture" prior to his reelection.
Susan M. Morris, President, Network for Women’s Equality
Former EPA Office of Civil Rights Assistant Director
Lesa L. Donnelly, Vice President of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Nancy Geehan, Natural Resource Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Alicia Dabney, Firefighter, USDA Forest Service
Alease Wright, Former EPA National Federal Women's Program Mgr
Angela Sanchez-Hand, Fire Battalion Chief, USDA Forest Service
Jonel Wagoner, Fire Training Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Darla Bush, Fire Captain, USDA Forest Service
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President, No Fear Coalition
Dr. Margaret Flowers, Organizer OccupyDC
Stacy Cunningham, former USDA Forest Service
Priscilla Peterson, GIS Specialist USDA, Forest Service
Darlene Hall, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Elisa Lopez, Recreation Technician, USDA Forest Service
Kristine Levitoff, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Janine McFarland, Archaeologist, USDA, Forest Service
Pam Balazer, Fuels Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Anonymous, Former EPA HR employee
Anonymous, EPA Employee, Administrator's Office
Lawrence Lucas, President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Michele Lucas, Artist and Supporter
Anonymous, EPA Employee on PIP
Susan Dean, former Agricultural Commodity Grader, USDA AMS
Terri Williams, President, Civil Rights Justice for NIH Employees
Anonymous, Former EPA Employee
Joe carson, PE, Nuclear Safety Engineer,Dept. of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN
Anonymous, USDA HQ
Anonymous, USDA HQ, Wash, D.C.
Anonymous, EPA Contracting, Regional Office
Lorraine Lucero, Retiree, Forest Service
SG, USDA
As a New Jersey native and major supporter of Hillary Clinton, having written an article when she was the First Lady in my publication "Women's International Network News" (WINews) in 1993, it is unbelievable to me that Ms. Jackson would allow the EPA to be part of the "War on Women" that included me and my staff, while supporting many of the people who continue to make EPA a scary place to work. Her political acumen did not appear to extend to many employees within the agency, particularly the whistleblowers and complainants who were trying to get her to clean up a totally unhealthy and often hostile work environment. She definitely owes an apology to those hardworking, productive, and dedicated public servants she allowed her management to destroy while she was in a position to take appropriate action. We would be happy to provide her, and the President's other political appointees, with a long list of highly professional women and men who should not only receive apologies, but full relief from the retaliation and harassment they endured for attempting to do their jobs for him and the country, often while we observed others violating the laws, misusing government funds, and abusing their authority.
Listed below are those who signed the October 2012 "Open Letter to the President - War on Women at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture" prior to his reelection.
Susan M. Morris, President, Network for Women’s Equality
Former EPA Office of Civil Rights Assistant Director
Lesa L. Donnelly, Vice President of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Nancy Geehan, Natural Resource Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Alicia Dabney, Firefighter, USDA Forest Service
Alease Wright, Former EPA National Federal Women's Program Mgr
Angela Sanchez-Hand, Fire Battalion Chief, USDA Forest Service
Jonel Wagoner, Fire Training Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Darla Bush, Fire Captain, USDA Forest Service
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President, No Fear Coalition
Dr. Margaret Flowers, Organizer OccupyDC
Stacy Cunningham, former USDA Forest Service
Priscilla Peterson, GIS Specialist USDA, Forest Service
Darlene Hall, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Elisa Lopez, Recreation Technician, USDA Forest Service
Kristine Levitoff, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Janine McFarland, Archaeologist, USDA, Forest Service
Pam Balazer, Fuels Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Anonymous, Former EPA HR employee
Anonymous, EPA Employee, Administrator's Office
Lawrence Lucas, President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Michele Lucas, Artist and Supporter
Anonymous, EPA Employee on PIP
Susan Dean, former Agricultural Commodity Grader, USDA AMS
Terri Williams, President, Civil Rights Justice for NIH Employees
Anonymous, Former EPA Employee
Joe carson, PE, Nuclear Safety Engineer,Dept. of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN
Anonymous, USDA HQ
Anonymous, USDA HQ, Wash, D.C.
Anonymous, EPA Contracting, Regional Office
Lorraine Lucero, Retiree, Forest Service
SG, USDA
EPA chief Lisa Jackson may be moving on November 16, 2012
Washington Post, In the Loop article By Al Kamen
EPA administrator Lisa Jackson (Andrew A. Nelles - AP)
Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson, said by insiders to be en route shortly back home to New Jersey after four years here, was in fine form last week at the big Environmental Law Institute gathering two days after President Obama’s re-election.
After asking all EPA appointees there to stand up, she said: “Everyone who wants my job, stand up!” “I know you’re out there Brad Campbell!” she said. Campbell, a Clinton enviro official who succeeded her as head of the New Jersey EPA, has been mentioned in the trade papers as a candidate.
Jackson also mentioned Jeff Holmstead, a Bush II EPA official and Mitt Romney adviser who could have gotten her job, adding, “Sorry about that.” She quickly confessed
she “really wasn’t sorry” that the election dashed his hopes. Holmstead told our colleague Juliet Eilperin Thursday that he was “flattered” that Jackson “has been following my career. I just hope she has also been following the president’s statements of support for U.S. coal, oil, and natural gas.”
No doubt she has.
EPA administrator Lisa Jackson (Andrew A. Nelles - AP)
Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson, said by insiders to be en route shortly back home to New Jersey after four years here, was in fine form last week at the big Environmental Law Institute gathering two days after President Obama’s re-election.
After asking all EPA appointees there to stand up, she said: “Everyone who wants my job, stand up!” “I know you’re out there Brad Campbell!” she said. Campbell, a Clinton enviro official who succeeded her as head of the New Jersey EPA, has been mentioned in the trade papers as a candidate.
Jackson also mentioned Jeff Holmstead, a Bush II EPA official and Mitt Romney adviser who could have gotten her job, adding, “Sorry about that.” She quickly confessed
she “really wasn’t sorry” that the election dashed his hopes. Holmstead told our colleague Juliet Eilperin Thursday that he was “flattered” that Jackson “has been following my career. I just hope she has also been following the president’s statements of support for U.S. coal, oil, and natural gas.”
No doubt she has.
THERE MAY BE SOME HOPE!!!! November 13, 2012
A Washington Post article by Al Kamen entitled "Obama's cabinet: Some go, some stay," listed a group of President Obama's political appointees who may go out as he moves into his second 4-year term. The list of "most likely to go" included EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, both of whom have been covered in articles about their civil rights failures.
The EPA, along with other major Departments and agencies, need a breath of fesh air if there is going to be change occurring in Washington, D.C. and in Obama's administration. The President should look for new people instead of recycling the "old" ones from the Clinton administration or those who worked at these agencies on other occasions. Lisa Jackson worked at EPA years before becoming the Administrator, which seriously impacted on her leadership and management, and Bob Perciasepe, a possible contender for her replacement, has been around for years as a Clinton retread.
If any agency in the Federal government needs fresh air, it's EPA. During the OccupyEPA protests and marches, Noam Chomsky, well-known American linguist, philosopher, historian and activist, stated that the agency had a "... sordid record of discrmination and retaliation against whistle blowers and policies that harm the poor and communities of color." This was evident in an article entitled "EPA Fails to Enforce Civil Rights Act - Secret Methyl Bromide Back-Room Deal Disregards Latino Children's Rights," by Brent Newell of the Center for Race, Poverty and the Environment. Newell reported,
"After parents of California Latino school children patiently waited twelve years for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to resolve civil rights violations,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced a secret settlement with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation that fails to enforce the Civil
Rights Act. The settlement excluded the parents and provided no meaningful actions to repair the harm caused by the Department’s discrimination." Further, "EPA’s
finding of racial discrimination in Angelita C. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation marks the first time the agency has ever found discrimination has
occurred, despite many civil rights complaints being lodged with EPA. Dozens of other complaints alleging discrimination have languished at EPA. ....Lisa Jackson
and the Obama Administration have failed to deliver on their promise to protect the civil rights of America’s low-income and communities of color who suffer
environmental injustice,” said Newell. “Despite Jackson’s claims that environmental justice is one of her top priorities, her agency’s conduct and record on civil rights
is pathetic.”
EPA's mismanagement of the Office of Civil Rights has continued for decades. In Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA, the appeallant stated, "This case presents an egregious example of an administrative agency systemically failing to carry out its duties to investigate civil rights complaints filed by disadvantaged citizens." Since that case was reported, the RNA website reports, "Despite Rosemere’s lawsuit and the subsequent national debate of the failures of the OCR, and despite your continued promises for EPA to increase efficiency in that office to make Environmental Justice a national priority, the OCR continues to fail in its intake and investigation guidelines in regard to Title VI complaints. To date, the EPA has ignored Rosemere’s various requests to meet with you and to voice our concerns and share our experiences in order to offer suggestions to improve OCR’s operations. And to date, only one case has ever attained a ruling of discrimination in support of Title VI claims [Angelita C. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulations] and it took more than ten years to achieve that result. Most cases are dismissed outright, claiming jurisdictional issues or other bureaucratic problems. Many groups across the country wonder why the OCR functions under such a dismal record, and this points succinctly to how OCR is disconnected from the disparate impacts that can be suffered by Environmental Justice populations nationwide."
In response to the Office of Civil Rights failures, not only with respect to Title VI community complaints, but Title VII internal employee complaints and affirmative employment, Jackson commissioned Deloitte Consulting, LLP at a cost of $350,000 to conduct an evaluation of the civil rights office. This was a repeat of what was done ten years earlier after Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo (Coleman-Adebayo v EPA) won her discrminiation case against EPA, which resulted in the passage by Congress of the 2002 No Fear Act. EPA then hired Holland & Knight as consultants to provide a report on the failures that occurred in the Office of Civil Rights. In spite of the report, after another decade of mismanagement under Director Karen Higginbotham, in March 2011, Deloitte issued their report that included OCR not adequately adjudicating Title VI Complaints, prevasive delays in accepting and investigating complaints, and failing to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports. Susan Morris, a subject matter expert in civil rights and former Assistant Director in OCR, reported numerous prohibited personnel practices and blew the whistle on the agency's refusal to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports for three years. Since her exposure of the agency, the Office of Special Counsel sent a letter and report to Lisa Jackson stating that the agency retaliated against Morris for whistleblowing so that she should be returned to the agency with full relief granted. Morris reported, "As usual, EPA ignores whatever they don't want to hear, so that they can continue to abuse the systems and violate the laws put in place to protect Federal employees and communities against discrimination and pollution. Instead of taking appropriate action against the perpetrators and violators, EPA rewards them for dragging complainants through a lengthy process so that they either give up or die before they receive justice. Ms. Jackson should step forward and do the right thing by those who were wronged during her administration. If she doesn't, then hopefully the President will appoint someone who will."
After the Deloitte report was issued, Jackson appointed Rafael DeLeon as the new Director of Civil Rights, over protests from women, while knowing that he had been previously removed as the Director of Human Resources following an investigation into alleged violations reported by a female employee. "Putting a lawyer in the Office of Civil Rights, who previously defended the agency against complainants, then allowing him to select another lawyer, without civil rights experience, as his Deputy, is outrageous. What complainant in their right mind wants to file a complaint against the agency and name the alleged discriminating officials under these circumstances? asked Morris. "The appointment of Mr. DeLeon, following the retirement of his mentor Ray Spears, allowed EPA to continue their previous positions. They went after me and my staff for protesting all of the violations that went on for almost ten years. I understand that they just moved the Special Emphasis Program observances and events, covered under civil rights affirmative employment program, to the created diversity office. This is just another example of their lack of knowledge and understanding of civil rights. If I were an EPA employee, I would now question under what authority they are funding, celebrating and recognizing only the designated protected groups, while exluding those that represent the diversity of our country," said Morris.
Comments regarding this article or any others may be sent to OccupyEPA@aol.com
The EPA, along with other major Departments and agencies, need a breath of fesh air if there is going to be change occurring in Washington, D.C. and in Obama's administration. The President should look for new people instead of recycling the "old" ones from the Clinton administration or those who worked at these agencies on other occasions. Lisa Jackson worked at EPA years before becoming the Administrator, which seriously impacted on her leadership and management, and Bob Perciasepe, a possible contender for her replacement, has been around for years as a Clinton retread.
If any agency in the Federal government needs fresh air, it's EPA. During the OccupyEPA protests and marches, Noam Chomsky, well-known American linguist, philosopher, historian and activist, stated that the agency had a "... sordid record of discrmination and retaliation against whistle blowers and policies that harm the poor and communities of color." This was evident in an article entitled "EPA Fails to Enforce Civil Rights Act - Secret Methyl Bromide Back-Room Deal Disregards Latino Children's Rights," by Brent Newell of the Center for Race, Poverty and the Environment. Newell reported,
"After parents of California Latino school children patiently waited twelve years for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to resolve civil rights violations,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced a secret settlement with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation that fails to enforce the Civil
Rights Act. The settlement excluded the parents and provided no meaningful actions to repair the harm caused by the Department’s discrimination." Further, "EPA’s
finding of racial discrimination in Angelita C. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation marks the first time the agency has ever found discrimination has
occurred, despite many civil rights complaints being lodged with EPA. Dozens of other complaints alleging discrimination have languished at EPA. ....Lisa Jackson
and the Obama Administration have failed to deliver on their promise to protect the civil rights of America’s low-income and communities of color who suffer
environmental injustice,” said Newell. “Despite Jackson’s claims that environmental justice is one of her top priorities, her agency’s conduct and record on civil rights
is pathetic.”
EPA's mismanagement of the Office of Civil Rights has continued for decades. In Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA, the appeallant stated, "This case presents an egregious example of an administrative agency systemically failing to carry out its duties to investigate civil rights complaints filed by disadvantaged citizens." Since that case was reported, the RNA website reports, "Despite Rosemere’s lawsuit and the subsequent national debate of the failures of the OCR, and despite your continued promises for EPA to increase efficiency in that office to make Environmental Justice a national priority, the OCR continues to fail in its intake and investigation guidelines in regard to Title VI complaints. To date, the EPA has ignored Rosemere’s various requests to meet with you and to voice our concerns and share our experiences in order to offer suggestions to improve OCR’s operations. And to date, only one case has ever attained a ruling of discrimination in support of Title VI claims [Angelita C. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulations] and it took more than ten years to achieve that result. Most cases are dismissed outright, claiming jurisdictional issues or other bureaucratic problems. Many groups across the country wonder why the OCR functions under such a dismal record, and this points succinctly to how OCR is disconnected from the disparate impacts that can be suffered by Environmental Justice populations nationwide."
In response to the Office of Civil Rights failures, not only with respect to Title VI community complaints, but Title VII internal employee complaints and affirmative employment, Jackson commissioned Deloitte Consulting, LLP at a cost of $350,000 to conduct an evaluation of the civil rights office. This was a repeat of what was done ten years earlier after Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo (Coleman-Adebayo v EPA) won her discrminiation case against EPA, which resulted in the passage by Congress of the 2002 No Fear Act. EPA then hired Holland & Knight as consultants to provide a report on the failures that occurred in the Office of Civil Rights. In spite of the report, after another decade of mismanagement under Director Karen Higginbotham, in March 2011, Deloitte issued their report that included OCR not adequately adjudicating Title VI Complaints, prevasive delays in accepting and investigating complaints, and failing to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports. Susan Morris, a subject matter expert in civil rights and former Assistant Director in OCR, reported numerous prohibited personnel practices and blew the whistle on the agency's refusal to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports for three years. Since her exposure of the agency, the Office of Special Counsel sent a letter and report to Lisa Jackson stating that the agency retaliated against Morris for whistleblowing so that she should be returned to the agency with full relief granted. Morris reported, "As usual, EPA ignores whatever they don't want to hear, so that they can continue to abuse the systems and violate the laws put in place to protect Federal employees and communities against discrimination and pollution. Instead of taking appropriate action against the perpetrators and violators, EPA rewards them for dragging complainants through a lengthy process so that they either give up or die before they receive justice. Ms. Jackson should step forward and do the right thing by those who were wronged during her administration. If she doesn't, then hopefully the President will appoint someone who will."
After the Deloitte report was issued, Jackson appointed Rafael DeLeon as the new Director of Civil Rights, over protests from women, while knowing that he had been previously removed as the Director of Human Resources following an investigation into alleged violations reported by a female employee. "Putting a lawyer in the Office of Civil Rights, who previously defended the agency against complainants, then allowing him to select another lawyer, without civil rights experience, as his Deputy, is outrageous. What complainant in their right mind wants to file a complaint against the agency and name the alleged discriminating officials under these circumstances? asked Morris. "The appointment of Mr. DeLeon, following the retirement of his mentor Ray Spears, allowed EPA to continue their previous positions. They went after me and my staff for protesting all of the violations that went on for almost ten years. I understand that they just moved the Special Emphasis Program observances and events, covered under civil rights affirmative employment program, to the created diversity office. This is just another example of their lack of knowledge and understanding of civil rights. If I were an EPA employee, I would now question under what authority they are funding, celebrating and recognizing only the designated protected groups, while exluding those that represent the diversity of our country," said Morris.
Comments regarding this article or any others may be sent to OccupyEPA@aol.com
VICTORY FOR OBAMA!! November 7, 2012
The President won a second term as the first Black to hold that office, which is a great victory, particularly for a country founded on equality and suffering from years of racism and interracial problems. If the Republicans had been more circumspect in picking their candidate, President Obama may not have been so lucky, but that is how luck works.
Americans lined up outside polling places for a myriad of reasons. Many in line at the polling place with me in Virginia said they were waiting in line for almost two and half hours to vote even though they were dismayed by their choices. They were not enamored with either candidate, so they were voting for what they were against. Voting for President Obama meant they were against Governor Romney's policies and positions, such as increasing the military and reversing women's rights, not necessarily agreeing with the President's performance these past four years. As a supporter of President Obama and his administration, following is an open letter from me to him about working in his administration.
Dear President Obama:
Now is really the time for the change that you promised the American people four years ago. You need to seriously consider those who supported you, as well as a large part of the population that did not vote for you. You have your work cut out for you and I personally believe that you need to start by cleaning your own house.
People in this country want moderation and the middle ground, not decisions too far to the left or the right. The country and the world are changing, so we are again hoping that you get it right this time because we know that if you do not do so, the lower and middle class in this country will suffer the most or we may not end up the country we envision. We don't need more movie or television stars, twitters or tweets; we need effective leadership.
After working in four Executive Departments and a small agency over the past 30 years, I found the last four years working in your administration, as a highly-respected senior female in management and civil rights, to be one of the worst experiences I have had in federal service. I was part of an agency, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, that had no sense of what was right, just, honorable or ethical, as laws and regulations were violated; employees were treated with contempt and disrespect, particularly women; whistleblowers who put their careers on the line for the public good were retaliated against; reprisal was taken against employees who complained of discrimination and harassment; personnel systems were misused; management authority was abused; nepotism, cronyism and favoritism ruled rather than the merit system; employees were threatened and destroyed personally and professionally; honesty and integrity were replaced with false accusations, investigations and even jailing employees; and complaints were not only ignored but the "complainers" were unmercifully squashed and destroyed. This was not the public service federal employees and I signed up for or wanted to be a part of because the leadership lacked the knowledge or commitment to do the right thing.
When you first took office four years ago, I was extremely excited to be a part of your time in office and personally wrote suggesting that you start a jobs program, prior to pushing through any other programs, so that the unemployed could get back to work first. My support of you, and that of my extended family, black and white, was that I, and my colleagues, were systematically destroyed, while those who violated the laws, regulations, with no sense of integrity or honor, were rewarded and are still there to wreak havoc on others. All of our complaints, marches, and protests were ignored by your administration. We couldn't tell if this was based on your policies and advice to your senior leaders or whether they were just insincere, incompetent or corrupt. Someone in your administration should take a look at the complaints against your administration filed by federal employees in the various systems: EEO, EEOC, OIG, OSC, MSPB, and District Court, then take a look at the handling of those complaints by the managers and leaders, whether or not they were resolved at the lowest level, or pushed through the systems to District Court misusing taxpayer funds and resources for their own ends.
We reported a Native American female being sexually harassed, forced to urinate in front of males, with other degrading actions taken against her in the U.S. Agriculture, Forest Service. She was fired. We reported a young woman taken out in handcuffs, put in jail overnight and criminally charged for two training courses that were charged on a government credit card she didn't sign. She is terrified and on administrative leave. We reported an entire group of civil rights professionals destroyed at EPA because of protests of mismanagement, illegal and regulatory violations. We reported EPA ignoring Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation for whistleblowing. We reported a class complaint filed by women in the USDA for discrimination and retaliation against women. We reported personnel systems and procedures being used against employees, particularly women, forcing them to resign or retire; women being threatened in the workplace at EPA by a male with an anger management problem; the EPA Inspector General ignoring regulatory violations; nepotism running wild not only at the Department of Justice, but EPA and other agencies. We reported a total disrespect for women in your administration as they were being forced out of their jobs and into the streets by your leadership. As Americans and public servants, we are angry, we want justice, and we will continue until someone hears us and takes action to fix the problems instead of covering them up and rewarding the perpetrators.
I am respectfully submitting this to you with the hope that you will consider cleaning your house first, so that the next four years are not a repeat of the first four. I also believe that there are too many lawyers making decisions in your administration (yourself excepted of course), who need to step back and allow lay professionals trained in their fields to carry out the work. As you know, lawyers think and act like lawyers, often causing stalemates, defense instead of settlement, and winning at all cost (excepting your election of course). Your legacy should not be dependent on those who are operating on their own agenda or contrary to our country's values. We look forward to your response to all of us out here hoping that you will now have the time and will make the effort to do the right thing by the men and women destroyed by your administration.
Susan M. Morris
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The map of the Blue and Red States showed the division in the country that is usually between the liberals and conservatives; the east and west coasts and the middle states.
President Obama took: Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine and Hawaii.
Governor Romney took: Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Utah and Alaska. Floridians are probably still in line voting with a razor-thin difference.
Americans lined up outside polling places for a myriad of reasons. Many in line at the polling place with me in Virginia said they were waiting in line for almost two and half hours to vote even though they were dismayed by their choices. They were not enamored with either candidate, so they were voting for what they were against. Voting for President Obama meant they were against Governor Romney's policies and positions, such as increasing the military and reversing women's rights, not necessarily agreeing with the President's performance these past four years. As a supporter of President Obama and his administration, following is an open letter from me to him about working in his administration.
Dear President Obama:
Now is really the time for the change that you promised the American people four years ago. You need to seriously consider those who supported you, as well as a large part of the population that did not vote for you. You have your work cut out for you and I personally believe that you need to start by cleaning your own house.
People in this country want moderation and the middle ground, not decisions too far to the left or the right. The country and the world are changing, so we are again hoping that you get it right this time because we know that if you do not do so, the lower and middle class in this country will suffer the most or we may not end up the country we envision. We don't need more movie or television stars, twitters or tweets; we need effective leadership.
After working in four Executive Departments and a small agency over the past 30 years, I found the last four years working in your administration, as a highly-respected senior female in management and civil rights, to be one of the worst experiences I have had in federal service. I was part of an agency, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, that had no sense of what was right, just, honorable or ethical, as laws and regulations were violated; employees were treated with contempt and disrespect, particularly women; whistleblowers who put their careers on the line for the public good were retaliated against; reprisal was taken against employees who complained of discrimination and harassment; personnel systems were misused; management authority was abused; nepotism, cronyism and favoritism ruled rather than the merit system; employees were threatened and destroyed personally and professionally; honesty and integrity were replaced with false accusations, investigations and even jailing employees; and complaints were not only ignored but the "complainers" were unmercifully squashed and destroyed. This was not the public service federal employees and I signed up for or wanted to be a part of because the leadership lacked the knowledge or commitment to do the right thing.
When you first took office four years ago, I was extremely excited to be a part of your time in office and personally wrote suggesting that you start a jobs program, prior to pushing through any other programs, so that the unemployed could get back to work first. My support of you, and that of my extended family, black and white, was that I, and my colleagues, were systematically destroyed, while those who violated the laws, regulations, with no sense of integrity or honor, were rewarded and are still there to wreak havoc on others. All of our complaints, marches, and protests were ignored by your administration. We couldn't tell if this was based on your policies and advice to your senior leaders or whether they were just insincere, incompetent or corrupt. Someone in your administration should take a look at the complaints against your administration filed by federal employees in the various systems: EEO, EEOC, OIG, OSC, MSPB, and District Court, then take a look at the handling of those complaints by the managers and leaders, whether or not they were resolved at the lowest level, or pushed through the systems to District Court misusing taxpayer funds and resources for their own ends.
We reported a Native American female being sexually harassed, forced to urinate in front of males, with other degrading actions taken against her in the U.S. Agriculture, Forest Service. She was fired. We reported a young woman taken out in handcuffs, put in jail overnight and criminally charged for two training courses that were charged on a government credit card she didn't sign. She is terrified and on administrative leave. We reported an entire group of civil rights professionals destroyed at EPA because of protests of mismanagement, illegal and regulatory violations. We reported EPA ignoring Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation for whistleblowing. We reported a class complaint filed by women in the USDA for discrimination and retaliation against women. We reported personnel systems and procedures being used against employees, particularly women, forcing them to resign or retire; women being threatened in the workplace at EPA by a male with an anger management problem; the EPA Inspector General ignoring regulatory violations; nepotism running wild not only at the Department of Justice, but EPA and other agencies. We reported a total disrespect for women in your administration as they were being forced out of their jobs and into the streets by your leadership. As Americans and public servants, we are angry, we want justice, and we will continue until someone hears us and takes action to fix the problems instead of covering them up and rewarding the perpetrators.
I am respectfully submitting this to you with the hope that you will consider cleaning your house first, so that the next four years are not a repeat of the first four. I also believe that there are too many lawyers making decisions in your administration (yourself excepted of course), who need to step back and allow lay professionals trained in their fields to carry out the work. As you know, lawyers think and act like lawyers, often causing stalemates, defense instead of settlement, and winning at all cost (excepting your election of course). Your legacy should not be dependent on those who are operating on their own agenda or contrary to our country's values. We look forward to your response to all of us out here hoping that you will now have the time and will make the effort to do the right thing by the men and women destroyed by your administration.
Susan M. Morris
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The map of the Blue and Red States showed the division in the country that is usually between the liberals and conservatives; the east and west coasts and the middle states.
President Obama took: Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine and Hawaii.
Governor Romney took: Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Utah and Alaska. Floridians are probably still in line voting with a razor-thin difference.
Vilsack's USDA: Still Victimizing the Victim November 5, 2012
By Ward Jordan (about the author) Permalink OpEdNews Op Eds 11/5/2012 at 04:49:26
During a federal news radio show, on October 16, 2012, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Thomas "Tom" Vilsack told listeners how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is addressing a legacy of discrimination claims. According to Vilsack, USDA engages in "better workforce training, more accountability and a deeper look at its data" to reduce agency complaint levels. Some may find the timing of Vilsack's taking to the airwaves a bit suspect. After all, his discourse on the gentler side of USDA which actively "trains" employees to be "sensitive to people of all races, in all regions of the country," broadcasted just days after a group of women filed a class action complaint of harassment and discrimination against him.
Who knows? Perhaps Secretary Vilsack's sound bites proclaiming "better days at USDA" played well to an unwitting audience unfamiliar with the Department of Agriculture's long-standing oppressive culture. One thing is for certain --- Vilsack's chorus painfully rang out bitter notes to the thousands of minorities, women and customers like the African-American farmers who were victimized and remain targets of the USDA's biased programs and policies.
No FEAR complaint data indicates that Vilsack's stated goal to make USDA a "better place" and "friendlier place" to work -- misses the mark. The USDA posted data shows a slight increase in the "number of formal complaints" filed since Vilsack assumed office in 2009. The "number of complainants" also increased since Vilsack took office. The number of complainants went from 394 in 2009 to 517 by September 30, 2012. Earlier this year various advocacy groups,(such as the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, Occupy EPA, The Coalition For Change, Inc.(C4C), No FEAR Coalition, Acorn8, Network for Women's Equality and others gathered in front of the Dr. Martin Luther King memorial to bring attention to USDA's persistent failure to hold officials "accountable" for bullying, discrimination and retaliation.
Group members say Secretary Vilsack's articulated accountability measures are weak. According to Mr. Lawrence Lucas, President-USDA Coalition of Minority
Employees, "Secretary Vilsack's accountability plan consistently fails to impose mandatory discipline on USDA officials who either violate civil rights laws or who harass employees like Ms. Alicia Dabney." USDA fired Ms. Dabney, a Native American who once served as a GS-4 apprentice firefighter with the U.S. Forest Service, after she reported an attempted sexual assault and complained of on-going harassment (such as being spit on and forced to urinate in her male co-workers presence.)
"It has been clear to me for quite some time that they would find any way possible to fire Alicia. If they didn't discredit her and fire her, they would have to fire the good old boy firefighters she made charges against," says Lesa Donnelly, Vice President-Coalition of Minority Employees." Coalition members have begun a petition to reinstate Alicia Dabney as well as to bring attention to the oppressive culture within USDA that persists in "victimizing the victim."
Last year Senator Charles Grassley petitioned the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture to hold a hearing on the reported wide spread abuses of civil rights throughout the USDA system. According to Mr. Lawrence Lucas, no such hearing has been held. "Civil rights is worst now, than under the Bush administration. After 150 years, USDA
remains the last plantation," says Lucas. Mr. Lawrence Lucas, President USDA Coalition of Minority Employees by Ward Jordan - http//www.coalition4change.org
The Coalition For Change, Inc.(C4C). C4C is a "support group" and a proactive non-profit organization comprised of former and present employees who have been injured or ill-treated due to workplace discrimination and/or reprisal.
During a federal news radio show, on October 16, 2012, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Thomas "Tom" Vilsack told listeners how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is addressing a legacy of discrimination claims. According to Vilsack, USDA engages in "better workforce training, more accountability and a deeper look at its data" to reduce agency complaint levels. Some may find the timing of Vilsack's taking to the airwaves a bit suspect. After all, his discourse on the gentler side of USDA which actively "trains" employees to be "sensitive to people of all races, in all regions of the country," broadcasted just days after a group of women filed a class action complaint of harassment and discrimination against him.
Who knows? Perhaps Secretary Vilsack's sound bites proclaiming "better days at USDA" played well to an unwitting audience unfamiliar with the Department of Agriculture's long-standing oppressive culture. One thing is for certain --- Vilsack's chorus painfully rang out bitter notes to the thousands of minorities, women and customers like the African-American farmers who were victimized and remain targets of the USDA's biased programs and policies.
No FEAR complaint data indicates that Vilsack's stated goal to make USDA a "better place" and "friendlier place" to work -- misses the mark. The USDA posted data shows a slight increase in the "number of formal complaints" filed since Vilsack assumed office in 2009. The "number of complainants" also increased since Vilsack took office. The number of complainants went from 394 in 2009 to 517 by September 30, 2012. Earlier this year various advocacy groups,(such as the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, Occupy EPA, The Coalition For Change, Inc.(C4C), No FEAR Coalition, Acorn8, Network for Women's Equality and others gathered in front of the Dr. Martin Luther King memorial to bring attention to USDA's persistent failure to hold officials "accountable" for bullying, discrimination and retaliation.
Group members say Secretary Vilsack's articulated accountability measures are weak. According to Mr. Lawrence Lucas, President-USDA Coalition of Minority
Employees, "Secretary Vilsack's accountability plan consistently fails to impose mandatory discipline on USDA officials who either violate civil rights laws or who harass employees like Ms. Alicia Dabney." USDA fired Ms. Dabney, a Native American who once served as a GS-4 apprentice firefighter with the U.S. Forest Service, after she reported an attempted sexual assault and complained of on-going harassment (such as being spit on and forced to urinate in her male co-workers presence.)
"It has been clear to me for quite some time that they would find any way possible to fire Alicia. If they didn't discredit her and fire her, they would have to fire the good old boy firefighters she made charges against," says Lesa Donnelly, Vice President-Coalition of Minority Employees." Coalition members have begun a petition to reinstate Alicia Dabney as well as to bring attention to the oppressive culture within USDA that persists in "victimizing the victim."
Last year Senator Charles Grassley petitioned the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture to hold a hearing on the reported wide spread abuses of civil rights throughout the USDA system. According to Mr. Lawrence Lucas, no such hearing has been held. "Civil rights is worst now, than under the Bush administration. After 150 years, USDA
remains the last plantation," says Lucas. Mr. Lawrence Lucas, President USDA Coalition of Minority Employees by Ward Jordan - http//www.coalition4change.org
The Coalition For Change, Inc.(C4C). C4C is a "support group" and a proactive non-profit organization comprised of former and present employees who have been injured or ill-treated due to workplace discrimination and/or reprisal.
Tell the DOJ to end its decade of dawdling on FBI whistleblower cases!
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has failed miserably in issuing timely decisions for FBI whistleblowers. Jane Turner and Robert Kobus’ whistleblowers cases have been pending for over 10 years and 5 years, respectively. Yesterday, Senator Grassley again called out the DOJ’s failure to protect FBI whistleblowers, and questioned their “willingness” to follow the law. TAKE ACTION! Demand that the DOJ issue final decisions for Turner and Kobus
Ironically, under the new Presidential Policy Directive for national security whistleblowers, the DOJ would review the effectiveness of its own broken whistleblower procedures. Senator Grassley requested that Attorney General Holder relinquish control over review of the FBI whistleblower process to the DOJ’s Inspector General.
This would ensure that the review is objective and would allow the Attorney General’s office to focus its resources on closing long pending cases. TAKE ACTION! Stop the DOJ from reviewing its own broken whistleblower process FBI whistleblowers should not have to wait over 10 years to have their case decided. It not only harms the whistleblower whose case is in limbo, but also discourages every other FBI employee from coming forward. The Attorney General must take immediate action to correct this injustice.
C4C ASKS OBAMA TO STOP BULLYING IN WORKPLACE November 3, 2012
The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C) submits that bullying, discrimination and retaliation is a pervasive problem in our workforce, both in the private sector and public sector. Please help circulate petition to end bullying. Tell Obama: We Need A Law To Protect U.S. Workers From Workplace Bullying http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/protect-us-workers/
THE SAME OLD STORY from USDA's VILSACK November 2, 2012
Working with U.S. Department of Agriiculture (USDA) years ago in a collaborative effort as a Deputy Regional Director for the U.S. Department of Interior, I learned that there were serious problems with their civil rights program. Many years later, after transferring to another major Department, becoming a Civil Rights Chief, I met a number of USDA civil rights professionals in Williamsburg attending a mandatory training conference. When I asked why and what they were being trained on, I heard the same refrain, "They are doing what they always do, making us take training to cover the problems. They either train everyone, reorganize or do a study, so it never changes." Based on the story below, it appears that after all these years, over 30, the USDA is doing what they do, as well as other agencies, to fix their civil rights problems.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) conduct basic EEO training, costing $500,000 a session, instead of using their internal civil rights professionals, who were already being paid to do the job. This was all done at a time when the civil rights program was being mismanaged according to a Deloitte Consulting program review and report. Thereafter, Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, transferred out Karen Higginbotham, the former Director, and transferred Rafael DeLeon into the position (see articles on "Rafael Must Go"), in spite of protests from women and marches against the agency. DeLeon then hired Deloitte Consulting to do an extensive review at a cost of $350,000, thereafter taking action against the civil rights employees in the office, rather than addressing their civil rights problems that were outlined for the Administrator by me, a subject matter expert.
Even after being told by the Office of Special Counsel that the agency retaliated against me for whistleblowing about the problems in the civil rights office under Higginbotham, Administrator Jackson simply dug in her heels, deciding to use the same methods a they often do - training, reorganization, and more of the same.
After reading the article below, I commented after each section, giving my opinions as a subject matter expert in civil rights.
__________________________________________________________________________
USDA fighting discrimination legacy with more training, accountability
Tuesday - 10/16/2012, 8:00am EDT
The Agriculture Department is addressing a legacy of discrimination claims by offering better workforce training, more accountability and a deeper look at its
data. "We can pay out hundreds of millions of dollars in claims ... or we can make sure those resources are available to the programs that help people," said USDA
Secretary Tom Vilsack in an interview with The Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Emily Kopp.
Training
The agency is training employees to be "sensitive to people of all races, in all regions of the country," Vilsack said. That includes political appointees, who must attend civil rights training. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack "The training is done by experts who come in and make us a lot more sensitive to comments and to actions that, in the past, maybe people would've thought were appropriate or funny but really are not appropriate and not funny, and taken in a way they should be," Vilsack said.
Those discrimination claims are also coming from within the workforce. Vilsack said the agency is opening up its hiring to more diversity, including at the Senior
Executive Service level. The workforce training is part of a larger effort — what Vilsack calls a "cultural transformation." He noted that the change comes at a time of much budget uncertainty, particularly without the passage of a farm bill.
I have already said above that "addressing a legacy of discrimination claims by offering better workforce training," is a tactic that hasn't work at USDA for over 30 years and won't work now - so why waste taxpayers' much-needed money by doing it again. A "deeper look" into the data doesn't give an agency a full understanding of what is really going on either. For example, a lower number of complaints may mean that the incidents of reprisal and retaliation are so high that employees are less likely to come into the system to complain, so the problems fester outside the process. Thank goodness political appointees come and go, but the permanent civilians at the top are the ones who can duck down until they go and are the ones who have the greatest impact on the culture and what takes place over the long run. The complaints and actions I read on USDA were coming from within the workforce, as well as the external complaints from the community and farmers. Sensitivity training is another "agency fix it" for dealing with the country's problems. The allegations of the women in USDA, who have now filed a class complaint (following other class complaints at USDA), were egregious actions that should have been dealt with visibly and expeditiously, so the workforce knows that the management is serious that the perpetrators will be held accountable. Excusing behavior as "maybe people would've thought were appropriate or funny," in my opinion, will not stop the problems. Does Secretary Vilsack consider the sexual harassment against Alicia Dabney in this category of "boys will be boys," therefore, thought it was funny to destroy a young woman trying to do her job? Was her firing by the leadership a message to other women in USDA that if they take exception and protest, they will also find themselves in the street?
USDA is an old agency that was formed in 1862, with cabinet status in 1889, so it started as an all white male domain, with a culture that takes time, effort and intelligence to change, not more rhetoric. A number of years ago, while employed in another Department, I assisted the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service, by reviewing their civil rights processes and procedures, so they could establish more effective policies and procedures. A few years ago, a subordinate of mine and I met with a USDA appointee, brought back into the department to handle the settlement of complaints by Black farmers, to acertain if we could assist him. Unfortunately, we were offered temporary details in positions that had no real authority to make a difference, so we declined the "opportunity."
Accountability
To address claims of discrimination within the USDA workforce, Vilsack said his office regularly reviews complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for each department and for each state. "If we see a spike in claims or incidences, we basically send folks out to do an investigation in why we've seen that spike," he said. And to keep track of who is receiving loans, front-line workers see metrics that hold them accountable for not meeting expectations, but also for meeting goals. "You hold people accountable when the job's not done well, but you also congratulate them when they are doing a good job," Vilsack said.
Civil rights professionals have complained for years about the lack of accountability of management for civil rights problems. For example, EPA Administrator Jackson transferred the OCR Director, Karen Higginbotham (who failed to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports for three years and according to Deloitte Consulting, and others, mismanaged the program) to her office in a position that another employee worked hard to secure for years. While all of the nonperformance was taking place, the OCR Director received the Administrator's Manager of the Year Award and a cash performance award in spite of protests from the OCR staff members. The Title VI Assistant Director received a Bronze Award after failing to process Title VI environmental complaints, (see Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA judge's decision), became a Special Assistant reporting to the new OCR Director, Mr. DeLeon, and remained in an Senior Executive Service program for the years of mismanagement. She was reporting to Rafael DeLeon, who the Administrator appointed him as the Director OCR, even though he had previous complaints filed against him and was removed, after an investigation into violations, as the Director of Human Resources. The civil rights employees, who complained about the problems in the office and violations of the laws and regulations to the Administrator, her senior staff, the EPA Inspector General, Congress, EEOC, OSC, MSPB, were retaliated against. The message being sent to the workforce by Administrator Jackson is that Karen Higginbotham and Rafael DeLeon, mentees of Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff, were being protected and rewarded, while those who blew the whistle or protested were being destroyed. I believe that Administrator Vilsack needs someone to give him some good advice and not just the use of terms that are old and tired to address the issues, such as "folks," "keep track," "meeting goals," "congratulate them when they doing a good job."
USDA has focused on areas with the highest numbers of discrimination complaints to compare the demographics of the community and the USDA loan recipients. "If, say, 10 percent is socially disadvantaged but only 0.5 percent [of loans] are going to socially disadvantaged farmers, then we know we've got a problem," Vilsack said. "We've got to go back into that county. We have to work with local folks to see why that is so. Is it that people don't know about the problem? Is it that the process is complicated and they're not getting assistance and help?" An initiative called Strike Force partners with communities in poor areas to provide training and mentoring on how to participate in USDA programs. "We're basically having communities identify projects that they think are important to them and work with them so they have success, see what success looks like and that will make it a little easier to replicate success," Vilsack said. In the past three years, 60 percent of its loans have gone to beginning farmers or socially disadvantaged farmers, he said.
I learned early in my career about assistance from the Feds to communities in the South Bronx. As a Regional official covering Region II, we took car loads of the senior Washington officials into areas in the South Bronx that looked like the aftermath of a war. These "tours," with promises that were never kept, reminded me of the current disasters that are being used for "photo ops" and politics. In total frustration, when no money or assistance was forthcoming that would make a real difference, we enlisted the local communities in cleaning up some of the areas, so that gardens could be planted and children's play- grounds could be installed. This country has allowed these and other such areas to exist throughout the United States as if they are the fault of the occupants rather than the policies being instituted by the leadership. The Black farmers and communities being impacted on by big-business pollution are given promises that are neve kept. The EPA is a prime example, failing to process environmental complaints, some of up to 15 years , that was finally exposed because of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association case brought against them. Now, Rafael DeLeon, an attorney who created the office that defended the agency against those who filed environmental complaints, is now in charge of processing those complaints. Secretary Vilsack needs to look at the progress made over the last four years under his leadership and his civil rights record. As my mother would say, "Just Do It!" And, get someone in there that knows what they are doing and can get things done.
Congressional action needed The Government Accountability Office found USDA had made significant progress in implementing a plan to resolve discrimination complaints. However, the agency is still struggling to settle past cases, particularly those that may have not have received "due respect" in the previous administration,
Vilsack said. A settlement last year will make $1.2 billion in claims available to as many as 65,000 black farmers. The payout could be as much as $250,000 for some, but one criticism of the settlement is it does not cover a long enough time. Since 2009, USDA has reviewed "several thousand cases" that were closed. But the statute of limitation in some of those cases has expired. The agency is now waiting on Congress to both authorize more funds — about $40 million — to resolve about 650 cases, as well as Congress to waive the statute of limitations on old cases, Vilsack said. "So far, this Congress has been unwilling to do that. ... We keep asking and we'll continue to ask, but we do need congressional authority," he said.
What in the world is "due respect" in the previous administration? Respect means giving a positive feeling of esteem or deference for a person or other entity gives a positive feeling of esteem or deference for a person or other entity. The failure to appropriately and expeditiously handle complaints filed by the black farmers, the devastating destruction to them and their families, cannot be couched under due respect. When the leadership really wants to accomplish something in this country, they just do it, money is no object. The amount of money budgeted for the military is enormous - but yet USDA cannot settle the egregious claims of the black farmers. USDA is trying to right the years of wrong by giving more excuses. Americans know that Congress has relinguished their responsibilities and much of their authority, allowing the Executive branch to run over them, but that does not excuse the USDA's years of mismanage-ment of a civil rights system.
I believe that the civil rights program in the Federal government has been intentionally distorted so that it is now totally ineffective. As one manager said, "Nobody likes EEO - not the complainants, not the managers, no one." The agencies, such as EEOC, MSPB and OSC, all in the business of protecting employees, have become part of the problem. Dragging complainants, internal and external, through a costly EEO process for years, using taxpayer's money and federal lawyers against them, in a system that does not work in their favor, is a major strategy that ensure that only the strong will survive - with many giving up, going away, or dying before or if they receive any justice. This strategy is evident at the USDA, with cases beyond the statute of limitations, and at EPA with numerous reports showing gross mismanagement and violations of civil rights laws and regulations.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) conduct basic EEO training, costing $500,000 a session, instead of using their internal civil rights professionals, who were already being paid to do the job. This was all done at a time when the civil rights program was being mismanaged according to a Deloitte Consulting program review and report. Thereafter, Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, transferred out Karen Higginbotham, the former Director, and transferred Rafael DeLeon into the position (see articles on "Rafael Must Go"), in spite of protests from women and marches against the agency. DeLeon then hired Deloitte Consulting to do an extensive review at a cost of $350,000, thereafter taking action against the civil rights employees in the office, rather than addressing their civil rights problems that were outlined for the Administrator by me, a subject matter expert.
Even after being told by the Office of Special Counsel that the agency retaliated against me for whistleblowing about the problems in the civil rights office under Higginbotham, Administrator Jackson simply dug in her heels, deciding to use the same methods a they often do - training, reorganization, and more of the same.
After reading the article below, I commented after each section, giving my opinions as a subject matter expert in civil rights.
__________________________________________________________________________
USDA fighting discrimination legacy with more training, accountability
Tuesday - 10/16/2012, 8:00am EDT
The Agriculture Department is addressing a legacy of discrimination claims by offering better workforce training, more accountability and a deeper look at its
data. "We can pay out hundreds of millions of dollars in claims ... or we can make sure those resources are available to the programs that help people," said USDA
Secretary Tom Vilsack in an interview with The Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Emily Kopp.
Training
The agency is training employees to be "sensitive to people of all races, in all regions of the country," Vilsack said. That includes political appointees, who must attend civil rights training. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack "The training is done by experts who come in and make us a lot more sensitive to comments and to actions that, in the past, maybe people would've thought were appropriate or funny but really are not appropriate and not funny, and taken in a way they should be," Vilsack said.
Those discrimination claims are also coming from within the workforce. Vilsack said the agency is opening up its hiring to more diversity, including at the Senior
Executive Service level. The workforce training is part of a larger effort — what Vilsack calls a "cultural transformation." He noted that the change comes at a time of much budget uncertainty, particularly without the passage of a farm bill.
I have already said above that "addressing a legacy of discrimination claims by offering better workforce training," is a tactic that hasn't work at USDA for over 30 years and won't work now - so why waste taxpayers' much-needed money by doing it again. A "deeper look" into the data doesn't give an agency a full understanding of what is really going on either. For example, a lower number of complaints may mean that the incidents of reprisal and retaliation are so high that employees are less likely to come into the system to complain, so the problems fester outside the process. Thank goodness political appointees come and go, but the permanent civilians at the top are the ones who can duck down until they go and are the ones who have the greatest impact on the culture and what takes place over the long run. The complaints and actions I read on USDA were coming from within the workforce, as well as the external complaints from the community and farmers. Sensitivity training is another "agency fix it" for dealing with the country's problems. The allegations of the women in USDA, who have now filed a class complaint (following other class complaints at USDA), were egregious actions that should have been dealt with visibly and expeditiously, so the workforce knows that the management is serious that the perpetrators will be held accountable. Excusing behavior as "maybe people would've thought were appropriate or funny," in my opinion, will not stop the problems. Does Secretary Vilsack consider the sexual harassment against Alicia Dabney in this category of "boys will be boys," therefore, thought it was funny to destroy a young woman trying to do her job? Was her firing by the leadership a message to other women in USDA that if they take exception and protest, they will also find themselves in the street?
USDA is an old agency that was formed in 1862, with cabinet status in 1889, so it started as an all white male domain, with a culture that takes time, effort and intelligence to change, not more rhetoric. A number of years ago, while employed in another Department, I assisted the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service, by reviewing their civil rights processes and procedures, so they could establish more effective policies and procedures. A few years ago, a subordinate of mine and I met with a USDA appointee, brought back into the department to handle the settlement of complaints by Black farmers, to acertain if we could assist him. Unfortunately, we were offered temporary details in positions that had no real authority to make a difference, so we declined the "opportunity."
Accountability
To address claims of discrimination within the USDA workforce, Vilsack said his office regularly reviews complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for each department and for each state. "If we see a spike in claims or incidences, we basically send folks out to do an investigation in why we've seen that spike," he said. And to keep track of who is receiving loans, front-line workers see metrics that hold them accountable for not meeting expectations, but also for meeting goals. "You hold people accountable when the job's not done well, but you also congratulate them when they are doing a good job," Vilsack said.
Civil rights professionals have complained for years about the lack of accountability of management for civil rights problems. For example, EPA Administrator Jackson transferred the OCR Director, Karen Higginbotham (who failed to submit mandatory affirmative employment reports for three years and according to Deloitte Consulting, and others, mismanaged the program) to her office in a position that another employee worked hard to secure for years. While all of the nonperformance was taking place, the OCR Director received the Administrator's Manager of the Year Award and a cash performance award in spite of protests from the OCR staff members. The Title VI Assistant Director received a Bronze Award after failing to process Title VI environmental complaints, (see Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA judge's decision), became a Special Assistant reporting to the new OCR Director, Mr. DeLeon, and remained in an Senior Executive Service program for the years of mismanagement. She was reporting to Rafael DeLeon, who the Administrator appointed him as the Director OCR, even though he had previous complaints filed against him and was removed, after an investigation into violations, as the Director of Human Resources. The civil rights employees, who complained about the problems in the office and violations of the laws and regulations to the Administrator, her senior staff, the EPA Inspector General, Congress, EEOC, OSC, MSPB, were retaliated against. The message being sent to the workforce by Administrator Jackson is that Karen Higginbotham and Rafael DeLeon, mentees of Ray Spears, former Deputy Chief of Staff, were being protected and rewarded, while those who blew the whistle or protested were being destroyed. I believe that Administrator Vilsack needs someone to give him some good advice and not just the use of terms that are old and tired to address the issues, such as "folks," "keep track," "meeting goals," "congratulate them when they doing a good job."
USDA has focused on areas with the highest numbers of discrimination complaints to compare the demographics of the community and the USDA loan recipients. "If, say, 10 percent is socially disadvantaged but only 0.5 percent [of loans] are going to socially disadvantaged farmers, then we know we've got a problem," Vilsack said. "We've got to go back into that county. We have to work with local folks to see why that is so. Is it that people don't know about the problem? Is it that the process is complicated and they're not getting assistance and help?" An initiative called Strike Force partners with communities in poor areas to provide training and mentoring on how to participate in USDA programs. "We're basically having communities identify projects that they think are important to them and work with them so they have success, see what success looks like and that will make it a little easier to replicate success," Vilsack said. In the past three years, 60 percent of its loans have gone to beginning farmers or socially disadvantaged farmers, he said.
I learned early in my career about assistance from the Feds to communities in the South Bronx. As a Regional official covering Region II, we took car loads of the senior Washington officials into areas in the South Bronx that looked like the aftermath of a war. These "tours," with promises that were never kept, reminded me of the current disasters that are being used for "photo ops" and politics. In total frustration, when no money or assistance was forthcoming that would make a real difference, we enlisted the local communities in cleaning up some of the areas, so that gardens could be planted and children's play- grounds could be installed. This country has allowed these and other such areas to exist throughout the United States as if they are the fault of the occupants rather than the policies being instituted by the leadership. The Black farmers and communities being impacted on by big-business pollution are given promises that are neve kept. The EPA is a prime example, failing to process environmental complaints, some of up to 15 years , that was finally exposed because of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association case brought against them. Now, Rafael DeLeon, an attorney who created the office that defended the agency against those who filed environmental complaints, is now in charge of processing those complaints. Secretary Vilsack needs to look at the progress made over the last four years under his leadership and his civil rights record. As my mother would say, "Just Do It!" And, get someone in there that knows what they are doing and can get things done.
Congressional action needed The Government Accountability Office found USDA had made significant progress in implementing a plan to resolve discrimination complaints. However, the agency is still struggling to settle past cases, particularly those that may have not have received "due respect" in the previous administration,
Vilsack said. A settlement last year will make $1.2 billion in claims available to as many as 65,000 black farmers. The payout could be as much as $250,000 for some, but one criticism of the settlement is it does not cover a long enough time. Since 2009, USDA has reviewed "several thousand cases" that were closed. But the statute of limitation in some of those cases has expired. The agency is now waiting on Congress to both authorize more funds — about $40 million — to resolve about 650 cases, as well as Congress to waive the statute of limitations on old cases, Vilsack said. "So far, this Congress has been unwilling to do that. ... We keep asking and we'll continue to ask, but we do need congressional authority," he said.
What in the world is "due respect" in the previous administration? Respect means giving a positive feeling of esteem or deference for a person or other entity gives a positive feeling of esteem or deference for a person or other entity. The failure to appropriately and expeditiously handle complaints filed by the black farmers, the devastating destruction to them and their families, cannot be couched under due respect. When the leadership really wants to accomplish something in this country, they just do it, money is no object. The amount of money budgeted for the military is enormous - but yet USDA cannot settle the egregious claims of the black farmers. USDA is trying to right the years of wrong by giving more excuses. Americans know that Congress has relinguished their responsibilities and much of their authority, allowing the Executive branch to run over them, but that does not excuse the USDA's years of mismanage-ment of a civil rights system.
I believe that the civil rights program in the Federal government has been intentionally distorted so that it is now totally ineffective. As one manager said, "Nobody likes EEO - not the complainants, not the managers, no one." The agencies, such as EEOC, MSPB and OSC, all in the business of protecting employees, have become part of the problem. Dragging complainants, internal and external, through a costly EEO process for years, using taxpayer's money and federal lawyers against them, in a system that does not work in their favor, is a major strategy that ensure that only the strong will survive - with many giving up, going away, or dying before or if they receive any justice. This strategy is evident at the USDA, with cases beyond the statute of limitations, and at EPA with numerous reports showing gross mismanagement and violations of civil rights laws and regulations.
OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA AFTER DEBATE
Go to: http://federalsoup.federaldaily.com/forumposts.asp?FID=7&TID=47120&title=fs-epa-complaint-to-the-president
October 19, 2012
Subject: War on Women at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture
Dear President Obama:
I, along with many women who supported your election, closely watched your debates with Governor Romney, mainly to hear what you had to say about women, particularly your position on civil rights. You said that you were against discrimination and supported women’s equality; you talked about your grand-mother, your mother, and your daughters. Contrary to your statements, we feel that you have failed to protect us (grandmothers, mothers, daughters, sisters, married and single women), based on our horrendous experience in your administration over the past four years.
We reported that there is a “War on Women” at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Agriculture (DA), Forest Service (FS), we marched against both agencies, we protested in the streets, we wrote letters to you and Congress, we formed groups and created websites – yet we have been ignored. Women have been seriously injured, personally, financially and professionally damaged, and forced out of our jobs on your watch by your political appointees, such as the EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and DA Secretary Vilsack.
As you stated clearly last night, the buck stops with you, so we are holding you accountable for their negligence in failing to protect us and turning a blind eye on our reports of discrimination, sexual abuse, retaliation, nepotism, misuse of federal funds, abuse of authority and power, non-use of the merit system, and violations of civil rights laws and regulations. You have been accused of not keeping your commitments because your statements do not always match what is happening in your administration, and we are prime examples of that problem. We are growing larger as a group every day and to our chagrin, we feel that we did not and could not have
done worse under a Republican administration.
We have seen and experienced the corruption in these agencies, happening for decades, using the very systems that have been put in place to protect us. EPA has even resorted to requesting that employees be criminally prosecuted and jailed. One man was put in jail for three years by EPA after being a witness in a discrimination case they lost; a young single Black female was recently put in jail overnight after taking her out of the agency in handcuffs based on educational courses; they attempted to do the same to me, but failed. They used the performance system to force other women out, while they engaged in nepotism and continued to violate the merit system. There has been no justice for these public servants, who are simply trying to serve your administration, meet their commitments to the taxpayers, and earn a living.
We would like to know what you plan to do to stop this “War on Women” in your administration over the next three weeks, particularly at these two agencies. We would like to hear from you and will publish your response. I can be contacted via email at LaLift1@aol.com. We are asking other women to sign up with us on various websites, so that the extent of this travesty against women in your administration can be realized.*
Sincerely,
Susan M. Morris, President, Network for Women’s Equality
Former EPA Office of Civil Rights Assistant Director
Lesa L. Donnelly, Vice President of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Nancy Geehan, Natural Resource Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Alicia Dabney, Firefighter, USDA Forest Service
Alease Wright, Former EPA National Federal Women's Program Mgr
Angela Sanchez-Hand, Fire Battalion Chief, USDA Forest Service
Jonel Wagoner, Fire Training Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Darla Bush, Fire Captain, USDA Forest Service
Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President, No Fear Coalition
Margaret Flowers, Organizer OccupyDC
Stacy Cunningham, former USDA Forest Service
Priscilla Peterson, GIS Specialist USDA, Forest Service
Darlene Hall, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Elisa Lopez, Recreation Technician, USDA Forest Service
Kristine Levitoff, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Janine McFarland, Archaeologist, USDA, Forest Service
Pam Balazer, Fuels Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Anonymous, Former EPA HR employee
Anonymous, EPA Employee, Administrator's Office
Lawrence Lucas, President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Michele Lucas, Artist and Supporter
Anonymous, EPA Employee on PIP
Susan Dean, former Agricultural Commodity Grader, USDA AMS
Terri Williams, President, Civil Rights Justice for NIH Employees
Anonymous, Former EPA Employee
Joe carson, PE, Nuclear Safety Engineer,Dept. of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN
Anonymous, USDA HQ
Anonymous, USDA HQ, Wash, D.C.
Anonymous, EPA Contracting, Regional Office
Lorraine Lucero, Retiree, Forest Service
*(If you would like your name (male or female) added to this letter either in support of these women or based on your own experience, please write us at OccupyEPA@aol.com or LaLift1@aol.com requesting that your name be added, along with your agency. If you wish to remain "Anonymous" because you are afraid of retaliation or in a process, please say that you would like to be on the list anonymously.)
Subject: War on Women at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture
Dear President Obama:
I, along with many women who supported your election, closely watched your debates with Governor Romney, mainly to hear what you had to say about women, particularly your position on civil rights. You said that you were against discrimination and supported women’s equality; you talked about your grand-mother, your mother, and your daughters. Contrary to your statements, we feel that you have failed to protect us (grandmothers, mothers, daughters, sisters, married and single women), based on our horrendous experience in your administration over the past four years.
We reported that there is a “War on Women” at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Agriculture (DA), Forest Service (FS), we marched against both agencies, we protested in the streets, we wrote letters to you and Congress, we formed groups and created websites – yet we have been ignored. Women have been seriously injured, personally, financially and professionally damaged, and forced out of our jobs on your watch by your political appointees, such as the EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and DA Secretary Vilsack.
As you stated clearly last night, the buck stops with you, so we are holding you accountable for their negligence in failing to protect us and turning a blind eye on our reports of discrimination, sexual abuse, retaliation, nepotism, misuse of federal funds, abuse of authority and power, non-use of the merit system, and violations of civil rights laws and regulations. You have been accused of not keeping your commitments because your statements do not always match what is happening in your administration, and we are prime examples of that problem. We are growing larger as a group every day and to our chagrin, we feel that we did not and could not have
done worse under a Republican administration.
We have seen and experienced the corruption in these agencies, happening for decades, using the very systems that have been put in place to protect us. EPA has even resorted to requesting that employees be criminally prosecuted and jailed. One man was put in jail for three years by EPA after being a witness in a discrimination case they lost; a young single Black female was recently put in jail overnight after taking her out of the agency in handcuffs based on educational courses; they attempted to do the same to me, but failed. They used the performance system to force other women out, while they engaged in nepotism and continued to violate the merit system. There has been no justice for these public servants, who are simply trying to serve your administration, meet their commitments to the taxpayers, and earn a living.
We would like to know what you plan to do to stop this “War on Women” in your administration over the next three weeks, particularly at these two agencies. We would like to hear from you and will publish your response. I can be contacted via email at LaLift1@aol.com. We are asking other women to sign up with us on various websites, so that the extent of this travesty against women in your administration can be realized.*
Sincerely,
Susan M. Morris, President, Network for Women’s Equality
Former EPA Office of Civil Rights Assistant Director
Lesa L. Donnelly, Vice President of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Nancy Geehan, Natural Resource Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Alicia Dabney, Firefighter, USDA Forest Service
Alease Wright, Former EPA National Federal Women's Program Mgr
Angela Sanchez-Hand, Fire Battalion Chief, USDA Forest Service
Jonel Wagoner, Fire Training Specialist, USDA Forest Service
Darla Bush, Fire Captain, USDA Forest Service
Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President, No Fear Coalition
Margaret Flowers, Organizer OccupyDC
Stacy Cunningham, former USDA Forest Service
Priscilla Peterson, GIS Specialist USDA, Forest Service
Darlene Hall, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Elisa Lopez, Recreation Technician, USDA Forest Service
Kristine Levitoff, Fire Training Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Janine McFarland, Archaeologist, USDA, Forest Service
Pam Balazer, Fuels Specialist, USDA, Forest Service
Anonymous, Former EPA HR employee
Anonymous, EPA Employee, Administrator's Office
Lawrence Lucas, President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Michele Lucas, Artist and Supporter
Anonymous, EPA Employee on PIP
Susan Dean, former Agricultural Commodity Grader, USDA AMS
Terri Williams, President, Civil Rights Justice for NIH Employees
Anonymous, Former EPA Employee
Joe carson, PE, Nuclear Safety Engineer,Dept. of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN
Anonymous, USDA HQ
Anonymous, USDA HQ, Wash, D.C.
Anonymous, EPA Contracting, Regional Office
Lorraine Lucero, Retiree, Forest Service
*(If you would like your name (male or female) added to this letter either in support of these women or based on your own experience, please write us at OccupyEPA@aol.com or LaLift1@aol.com requesting that your name be added, along with your agency. If you wish to remain "Anonymous" because you are afraid of retaliation or in a process, please say that you would like to be on the list anonymously.)
See C4C Youtube video on EEOC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfIEUEt_Qdo&feature=youtu.be
Press Advisory October 16, 2012
For Immediate Release
No Fear Coalition
Network for Women’s Equality
Occupy Washington, DC
October 16, 2012
240-731-9577
President Obama: Stop the War on Women
The No FEAR Coalition, Network for Women’s Equality (Net-WE) and Occupy Washington, DC applaud the courage of twelve women at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) who have filed a class complaint against USDA Secretary TomVilsack that included President Barack Obama because their protests of being sexually
harassed and retaliated against have been ignored by the administration.
At the USDA Forest Service, Alicia Dabney, a Native American female firefighter, endured humiliation at the hands of her supervisor and male peers that included
sexually explicit comments. A year ago, the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees had a rally outside the USDA headquarters to protest this case and others in the Forest Service. “We met with representatives of the White House, Secretary Vilsack and his staff to discuss widespread civil rights violations, after which Secretary Vilsack
personally apologized for the failure to address these issues. But, in spite of his apology, Ms. Dabney was fired and the perpetrators are still employed,” said Lawrence Lucas, President of the Coalition. The No FEAR Coalition has posted a Youtube of Ms. Dabney's supervisor's call ordering her to his bedroom at: www.marshacoleman-adebayo, look under the women whistle tab. Please go to http://beforeitsnews.com/womens-issues/2012/10/breaking-12-women-file-class-action-against-usda-and-president-obama-2440466.html to read the press release from the USDA women. Also, please sign a petition in support of Alicia Dabney at:
http://landrightsnfarming-landrightnfarming.blogspot.com/2012/08/fw-please-support-alicia-dabney-sign.html.
Lesa Donnelly, representing the USDA women in their class action asked, “What kind of message does this send to other women in the Department of Agriculture? We have tried to get the administration to address these issues and take positive corrective actions on behalf of the victims. We have written letters, we have marched, we have protested, all to no avail. Instead, the response has been, “We hear your words and take them seriously.” Donnelly continued, “How seriously are these incidents
being taken, when sexual assaults, attempted rapes, and workplace violence are ignored and the women are further victimized. Nothing seems to get the attention of the people in this administration.”
In response to the announcement of the USDA class action, Susan Morris, President of Net-WE and a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) whistleblower, said
"There is a war on women currently going on in the Federal government and it is not only at USDA.” After a lengthy investigation by the Office of Special Counsel, Morris was found to have been retaliated against by senior leaders at EPA for exposing violations of civil rights laws and regulations, but the agency has failed to take corrective
action. “Many EPA female employees have contacted me to talk about EPA management’s institutionalized and abusive methods of destroying their personal and professional lives. They are using performance improvement plans, unnecessary investigations, false accusations and even attempt to have employees criminally prosecuted. It’s really an evil and disgraceful environment that has no place in our government or democracy,”said Morris. “The President needs to step up and tell his political appointees to stop the war on women that is taking place on his watch.”
The War on Women has moved from simply crushing the careers of women at the Agency to pressing criminal charges. A young woman was recently taken out of EPA in
handcuffs to spend the night in jail. Other whistleblowers have met a similar fate, including incarceration in federal prison. “The whistleblower to prison pipeline must end,” said Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, president of the No FEAR Coalition.
"Occupy Washington DC stands in solidarity with the twelve women whistleblowers who are being retaliated against for standing up for their rights to be treated with respect in the workplace and who's request for protection are being ignored” stated Dr. Margaret Flowers. “We call on President Obama to intercede in the USDA to protect
the rights of these women who work under his administration and see that those who break the law are held accountable. All workers should feel safe from harassment in the United States."
No Fear Coalition
Network for Women’s Equality
Occupy Washington, DC
October 16, 2012
240-731-9577
President Obama: Stop the War on Women
The No FEAR Coalition, Network for Women’s Equality (Net-WE) and Occupy Washington, DC applaud the courage of twelve women at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) who have filed a class complaint against USDA Secretary TomVilsack that included President Barack Obama because their protests of being sexually
harassed and retaliated against have been ignored by the administration.
At the USDA Forest Service, Alicia Dabney, a Native American female firefighter, endured humiliation at the hands of her supervisor and male peers that included
sexually explicit comments. A year ago, the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees had a rally outside the USDA headquarters to protest this case and others in the Forest Service. “We met with representatives of the White House, Secretary Vilsack and his staff to discuss widespread civil rights violations, after which Secretary Vilsack
personally apologized for the failure to address these issues. But, in spite of his apology, Ms. Dabney was fired and the perpetrators are still employed,” said Lawrence Lucas, President of the Coalition. The No FEAR Coalition has posted a Youtube of Ms. Dabney's supervisor's call ordering her to his bedroom at: www.marshacoleman-adebayo, look under the women whistle tab. Please go to http://beforeitsnews.com/womens-issues/2012/10/breaking-12-women-file-class-action-against-usda-and-president-obama-2440466.html to read the press release from the USDA women. Also, please sign a petition in support of Alicia Dabney at:
http://landrightsnfarming-landrightnfarming.blogspot.com/2012/08/fw-please-support-alicia-dabney-sign.html.
Lesa Donnelly, representing the USDA women in their class action asked, “What kind of message does this send to other women in the Department of Agriculture? We have tried to get the administration to address these issues and take positive corrective actions on behalf of the victims. We have written letters, we have marched, we have protested, all to no avail. Instead, the response has been, “We hear your words and take them seriously.” Donnelly continued, “How seriously are these incidents
being taken, when sexual assaults, attempted rapes, and workplace violence are ignored and the women are further victimized. Nothing seems to get the attention of the people in this administration.”
In response to the announcement of the USDA class action, Susan Morris, President of Net-WE and a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) whistleblower, said
"There is a war on women currently going on in the Federal government and it is not only at USDA.” After a lengthy investigation by the Office of Special Counsel, Morris was found to have been retaliated against by senior leaders at EPA for exposing violations of civil rights laws and regulations, but the agency has failed to take corrective
action. “Many EPA female employees have contacted me to talk about EPA management’s institutionalized and abusive methods of destroying their personal and professional lives. They are using performance improvement plans, unnecessary investigations, false accusations and even attempt to have employees criminally prosecuted. It’s really an evil and disgraceful environment that has no place in our government or democracy,”said Morris. “The President needs to step up and tell his political appointees to stop the war on women that is taking place on his watch.”
The War on Women has moved from simply crushing the careers of women at the Agency to pressing criminal charges. A young woman was recently taken out of EPA in
handcuffs to spend the night in jail. Other whistleblowers have met a similar fate, including incarceration in federal prison. “The whistleblower to prison pipeline must end,” said Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, president of the No FEAR Coalition.
"Occupy Washington DC stands in solidarity with the twelve women whistleblowers who are being retaliated against for standing up for their rights to be treated with respect in the workplace and who's request for protection are being ignored” stated Dr. Margaret Flowers. “We call on President Obama to intercede in the USDA to protect
the rights of these women who work under his administration and see that those who break the law are held accountable. All workers should feel safe from harassment in the United States."
SHAME on YOU October 8, 2012
More women are joining us - and one asked that we reprint the cover letter Susan Morris wrote to Administrator Lisa Jackson, May 3, 2011 in response to the Deloitte Report that cost taxpayers $350,000. The EPA is using institutionalized methods to terminate employees, particularly women. Their usual is what one employee referred to as the "PAP, PIP, POOF" system that puts an employee on a performance plan, usually unattainable, so that they can state at some future forum that they did not meet the performance objectives set out for them and "Poof" they are fired! We have also been contacted by employees with disabilities. You can contact us at: OccupyEPA@aol.com and we will keep your information confidential. The President needs to take responsibility for what is happening in the EPA.
Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Administrator Jackson:
I am in receipt of the Deloitte Consultant Report submitted to the agency on March 21, 2010 that contains an evaluation of the EPA Office of Civil Rights (OCR) as dysfunctional and unproductive. While the report includes some valid issues and recommendations, it unfortunately places the major blame on the employees rather than where it belongs – on the ineffective management and leadership in OCR for over a decade.
My colleagues and I are dismayed and angered by the inaccuracies and misleading statements made throughout the report. After enduring years of bad management and discrimination in OCR, the employees should not have to endure further mis- and disinformation. We believe that you have a responsibility to hold those who violated laws and regulations accountable and that we have a right to defend ourselves from what we consider to be false statements and a corrupt system.
When I joined the agency in 2001 there was an armed guard at the entrance to the OCR office. It was shocking to know that I was coming to work at an agency and office in which matters had reached the level of workplace threats. Eight years later in 2009, I wrote to you and the EPA Office of Inspector General outlining my own
frustration and chagrin over violations, cronyism, nepotism, favoritism, retaliation, discrimination and a hostile work environment. In my prophetic letter, I wrote about the “EPA Mafia”and the horrendous situation of being attacked day in and day out by Karen Higginbotham and her cronies, which would probably result in my demise as a career public servant. I wondered how this small group of corrupt Federal employees in a small agency could ignore my years of outstanding performance and recognition as a civil rights professional to carry this out (see Attachment C).
The actions taken by EPA management do not take environmental geniuses to know what is going on. EPA does not appear to care about violations of laws and regulations because they will be defended by more than 1,000 agency attorneys and use taxpayer money to carry out their vendettas. Employees are dragged through hell
for years, while the agency defends itself from these so-called disgruntled employees. Women are discredited by besmirching their characters and treating them with shocking contempt and name-calling. The question is why EPA is in the same turmoil and chaos ten years after the armed guard left? Deloitte should not be patting EPA on the back for hiring them for $350,000, making civil rights a priority again, making diversity the buzz word, and recycling a failed Director. One woman said that she was just glad that Mr. DeLeon ended up in OCR and not her office. Your tolerance of the corruption and lack of appropriate action on your watch leads employees to believe that you condone violations of laws and regulations. The perception is that is it an intentional strategy of making civil rights meaningless and simply paid “lip service.” I believe women and other employees deserve better than this from you and the Obama administration.
After five members of my staff in Affirmative Employment & Diversity (AE&D) wrote to Congress for assistance to stop the harassment, a fact finding was conducted on your behalf. As a result of telling the truth in signed statements that exposed racist and threatening statements against me, they have been subjected to unbelievable retaliation. In response to my attempt to alert you and your inner circle that the Director refused to submit mandatory MD-715 Reports to EEOC for four years (which would be reported to Congress under a new EEOC policy), I was subjected to retaliation for whistle blowing. You allowed me to be terminated after 30 years of outstanding public service and you allowed others to receive undeserved awards and praise (see Attachments C and F). Unfortunately, all of this misery and corruption is being done using taxpayers’ money and has been continuing for years (see Attachment G – NTE Union Inside the Fishbowl 2004). You are allowing these employees to move along as if nothing is happening, particularly Mr. DeLeon who appears to be on a rampage against my staff. Four complaints have been filed against him already and two of my staff are out on extended sick leave due to a hostile work environment and retaliation.
As you know, I was returned to the agency under a Mandatory 90-Day Stay implemented by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for being retaliated against for whistle blowing (October 18, 2010 to January 21, 2011). Amazingly, EPA does not appear to take OSC, EEOC, MSPB or any other regulatory agency seriously. Instead of being embarrassed by a mandatory stay, the agency attacked the OSC investigator in a motion to MSPB. Rafael DeLeon ignored the MSPB Order and I spent three months on mundane projects he assigned, while trying to protect my staff from him and the gang of attorneys he brought into OCR. Laura FentonMiller, a lawyer on a detail, spent her time taking copious notes in all meetings Rafael DeLeon had with me and then the EPA attorneys had the gall to list her as a witness against me. When the stay ended, Rafael terminated me again. I had never worked for him and was shocked to find his behavior punitive, threatening and dictatorial, braggadocios, egotistical, misogynistic
and bias, all unacceptable behaviors for a manager of people. After years of reporting to civil rights leaders, General Officers and CEOs of industry, Mr. DeLeon is frightening to me and others. He runs from meeting to meeting talking down to people and making negative statements. Can you imagine the egoism of a man with his history saying to me, “I hope you don’t think anyone has any respect for you or your staff?”
The horrendous statements and name-calling mainly against women at EPA do not start or stop with Mr. DeLeon, who recently referred to me and Marsha Coleman-Adebayo as “Pink Elephants” and her as an “EPA Rosa Parks.” Ms. Higginbotham made a libelous statement against me in an OIG investigation; her Adminis-trative Assistant Stephanie McCoy was allowed to call me “low class” and a “bitch” in front of my staff and was later promoted by Rafael; Gordon Schisler, former OCR Deputy,
threatened me by saying I was lucky “he could only be angry,” meaning he would have hit me if he could; Ms. Higginbotham called me a “little white woman,” and
threatened me professionally. I had to be defended by a male subordinate in a meeting with Gordon screaming, while two females were crying because of his disturbing behavior. Before he retired, Gordon wrote that I was “evil,” and had “no soul,” among other horrible things. He threatened the two women on my staff so they were afraid and took sick leave until he retired. What kind of place is EPA that would allow this type of behavior against women?
I have thoroughly evaluated the Deloitte Report (Attachment B) as a subject matter expert and civil rights career professional. The report attempts to show that the problems are so immense that more “leaders” need to be involved. I have witnessed this maneuver before - it did not work then and I believe it will not work again. It
is unimaginable that EPA cannot handle a small civil rights program for 17,800 employees. I am requesting that this report be corrected, the agency settle complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed against the agency (there are now four internally against Mr. DeLeon and one in District Court), and correct the misdirected awards and
recognition of nonperformers. I plan to share this with everyone who will listen and take action on behalf of the EPA and OCR employees who have been seriously damaged by this terribly polluted workplace environment. An agency that cannot protect its own employees cannot possibly protect the public.
Sincerely,
Susan M. Morris
Attachments A-G
Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Administrator Jackson:
I am in receipt of the Deloitte Consultant Report submitted to the agency on March 21, 2010 that contains an evaluation of the EPA Office of Civil Rights (OCR) as dysfunctional and unproductive. While the report includes some valid issues and recommendations, it unfortunately places the major blame on the employees rather than where it belongs – on the ineffective management and leadership in OCR for over a decade.
My colleagues and I are dismayed and angered by the inaccuracies and misleading statements made throughout the report. After enduring years of bad management and discrimination in OCR, the employees should not have to endure further mis- and disinformation. We believe that you have a responsibility to hold those who violated laws and regulations accountable and that we have a right to defend ourselves from what we consider to be false statements and a corrupt system.
When I joined the agency in 2001 there was an armed guard at the entrance to the OCR office. It was shocking to know that I was coming to work at an agency and office in which matters had reached the level of workplace threats. Eight years later in 2009, I wrote to you and the EPA Office of Inspector General outlining my own
frustration and chagrin over violations, cronyism, nepotism, favoritism, retaliation, discrimination and a hostile work environment. In my prophetic letter, I wrote about the “EPA Mafia”and the horrendous situation of being attacked day in and day out by Karen Higginbotham and her cronies, which would probably result in my demise as a career public servant. I wondered how this small group of corrupt Federal employees in a small agency could ignore my years of outstanding performance and recognition as a civil rights professional to carry this out (see Attachment C).
The actions taken by EPA management do not take environmental geniuses to know what is going on. EPA does not appear to care about violations of laws and regulations because they will be defended by more than 1,000 agency attorneys and use taxpayer money to carry out their vendettas. Employees are dragged through hell
for years, while the agency defends itself from these so-called disgruntled employees. Women are discredited by besmirching their characters and treating them with shocking contempt and name-calling. The question is why EPA is in the same turmoil and chaos ten years after the armed guard left? Deloitte should not be patting EPA on the back for hiring them for $350,000, making civil rights a priority again, making diversity the buzz word, and recycling a failed Director. One woman said that she was just glad that Mr. DeLeon ended up in OCR and not her office. Your tolerance of the corruption and lack of appropriate action on your watch leads employees to believe that you condone violations of laws and regulations. The perception is that is it an intentional strategy of making civil rights meaningless and simply paid “lip service.” I believe women and other employees deserve better than this from you and the Obama administration.
After five members of my staff in Affirmative Employment & Diversity (AE&D) wrote to Congress for assistance to stop the harassment, a fact finding was conducted on your behalf. As a result of telling the truth in signed statements that exposed racist and threatening statements against me, they have been subjected to unbelievable retaliation. In response to my attempt to alert you and your inner circle that the Director refused to submit mandatory MD-715 Reports to EEOC for four years (which would be reported to Congress under a new EEOC policy), I was subjected to retaliation for whistle blowing. You allowed me to be terminated after 30 years of outstanding public service and you allowed others to receive undeserved awards and praise (see Attachments C and F). Unfortunately, all of this misery and corruption is being done using taxpayers’ money and has been continuing for years (see Attachment G – NTE Union Inside the Fishbowl 2004). You are allowing these employees to move along as if nothing is happening, particularly Mr. DeLeon who appears to be on a rampage against my staff. Four complaints have been filed against him already and two of my staff are out on extended sick leave due to a hostile work environment and retaliation.
As you know, I was returned to the agency under a Mandatory 90-Day Stay implemented by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for being retaliated against for whistle blowing (October 18, 2010 to January 21, 2011). Amazingly, EPA does not appear to take OSC, EEOC, MSPB or any other regulatory agency seriously. Instead of being embarrassed by a mandatory stay, the agency attacked the OSC investigator in a motion to MSPB. Rafael DeLeon ignored the MSPB Order and I spent three months on mundane projects he assigned, while trying to protect my staff from him and the gang of attorneys he brought into OCR. Laura FentonMiller, a lawyer on a detail, spent her time taking copious notes in all meetings Rafael DeLeon had with me and then the EPA attorneys had the gall to list her as a witness against me. When the stay ended, Rafael terminated me again. I had never worked for him and was shocked to find his behavior punitive, threatening and dictatorial, braggadocios, egotistical, misogynistic
and bias, all unacceptable behaviors for a manager of people. After years of reporting to civil rights leaders, General Officers and CEOs of industry, Mr. DeLeon is frightening to me and others. He runs from meeting to meeting talking down to people and making negative statements. Can you imagine the egoism of a man with his history saying to me, “I hope you don’t think anyone has any respect for you or your staff?”
The horrendous statements and name-calling mainly against women at EPA do not start or stop with Mr. DeLeon, who recently referred to me and Marsha Coleman-Adebayo as “Pink Elephants” and her as an “EPA Rosa Parks.” Ms. Higginbotham made a libelous statement against me in an OIG investigation; her Adminis-trative Assistant Stephanie McCoy was allowed to call me “low class” and a “bitch” in front of my staff and was later promoted by Rafael; Gordon Schisler, former OCR Deputy,
threatened me by saying I was lucky “he could only be angry,” meaning he would have hit me if he could; Ms. Higginbotham called me a “little white woman,” and
threatened me professionally. I had to be defended by a male subordinate in a meeting with Gordon screaming, while two females were crying because of his disturbing behavior. Before he retired, Gordon wrote that I was “evil,” and had “no soul,” among other horrible things. He threatened the two women on my staff so they were afraid and took sick leave until he retired. What kind of place is EPA that would allow this type of behavior against women?
I have thoroughly evaluated the Deloitte Report (Attachment B) as a subject matter expert and civil rights career professional. The report attempts to show that the problems are so immense that more “leaders” need to be involved. I have witnessed this maneuver before - it did not work then and I believe it will not work again. It
is unimaginable that EPA cannot handle a small civil rights program for 17,800 employees. I am requesting that this report be corrected, the agency settle complaints of discrimination and retaliation filed against the agency (there are now four internally against Mr. DeLeon and one in District Court), and correct the misdirected awards and
recognition of nonperformers. I plan to share this with everyone who will listen and take action on behalf of the EPA and OCR employees who have been seriously damaged by this terribly polluted workplace environment. An agency that cannot protect its own employees cannot possibly protect the public.
Sincerely,
Susan M. Morris
Attachments A-G
EPA - Stop the War on Women October 5, 2012
Women are between a rock and a hard place - if you want to consider President Obama a rock and Mitt Romney a hard place in the upcoming election. The President is supposedly for women, so as women concerned for our well-being and independence, we would want to vote for him. But, we are a group of women who have been abused and fired on trumped up charges at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. So, we are asking ourselves if anyone is telling the truth out there in political land or if it is all just more political election rhetoric and lies.
Administrator Lisa Jackson was appointed by the President to carry out the policies of his administration, yet women are out marching against her because she is ignoring what is happening to the women in EPA, protesting her selection of Rafael DeLeon as the Director of Civil Rights and asking that he be fired, and filing whistle blower and discrimination complaints. But, Ms. Jackson is still not convinced and is willing to go to the mat for the "insiders" who have run EPA for decades. Fortunately, more women are coming forward and reporting that the agency has institutionalized going after employees who raise objections to violations, particularly women. One young female employee said, "There is a culture at EPA that has been created by employees, some of whom have been there since they got out of school when the agency was formed. They disrespect, abuse and go after anyone who raises issue they don't want to hear or bring violations of regulations or laws to their attention." She said that she was concerned about the hiringi practices that she wanted to report to a senior official. The words were barely out of her mouth before she was being escorted from her office by guards and told she was to pack up for another assignment. She was then assigned to a woman whose main job appeared to be bullying her on a daily basis, stressing her out, embarrassing her and psychologically destroying her. "It was so bad that I just couldn't take the bullying anymore, so I just tried to hold myself together. I knew they were going after me, but there was no where for me to go. You can't trust the Civil Rights Office, the lawyers, or even the IG, so what was I supposed to do?" she said. "Their next step was to put me on Leave Without Pay, accuse me of insubordination and then fire me." As a single woman not yet eligible for retirement, her situation is a crime. Interestingly enough, she was replaced by one of the other favorites in the workforce, which is also part of the EPA system.
Another young woman we mentioned in this blog was taken out in handcuffs to spend the night in jail, which is unimaginable. EPA doesn't appear to want to just injure you, they want to destroy you totally so that you can never work again. There was a case years ago in which a male employee testified as a witness in a well-known case against EPA that they lost. The employee was later accused of travel fraud, arrested and spent years in prison. If the President wants to pardon people, he needs to start with him, another victim of EPA's war against their employees.
A long-term female employee was forced out on retirement after using the performance system to do the dirty work and another female ran out the door to another agency, where she said she is "treated with respect" as a professional and human being. "I knew it was bad at EPA, I just didn't realize how bad it was until I left and began to be treated with respect and courtesy as a woman and professional. EPA is bad, really bad." The system employed appears to include performance ratings, use of gossip, innuendo, false statements and charges, forcing the employee to throw up their hands, give up, retire, resign or be fired. A senior female civil rights official, Susan Morris, said, "I asked Ms. Jackson to stop the corruption at EPA that I was learned about and allow me to assist her in making the EPA civil rights program a model for other agencies. Instead, she supported those guilty of violating the laws and regulations and actually rejected an Office of Special Counsel finding that I was retaliated for whistle blowing and should be returned to the agency with full benefits and relief. As a supporter of President Obama and his administration, I find her unwillingness to step up and resolve some of these issues as a strike against him and his administration. I am sure he doesn't just mean his wife and daughters when he is talking about support for women and their rights."
So, what are these women expected to do when they have been abandoned by the President and are already in a hard place? As more women join the fray, we are going to decide what needs to be done to get the Administration and Ms. Jackson's attention. Anyone interested in joining us can write to OccupyEPA@aol.com. Whatever is sent will be kept confidential because we know the EPA culture and environment.
Administrator Lisa Jackson was appointed by the President to carry out the policies of his administration, yet women are out marching against her because she is ignoring what is happening to the women in EPA, protesting her selection of Rafael DeLeon as the Director of Civil Rights and asking that he be fired, and filing whistle blower and discrimination complaints. But, Ms. Jackson is still not convinced and is willing to go to the mat for the "insiders" who have run EPA for decades. Fortunately, more women are coming forward and reporting that the agency has institutionalized going after employees who raise objections to violations, particularly women. One young female employee said, "There is a culture at EPA that has been created by employees, some of whom have been there since they got out of school when the agency was formed. They disrespect, abuse and go after anyone who raises issue they don't want to hear or bring violations of regulations or laws to their attention." She said that she was concerned about the hiringi practices that she wanted to report to a senior official. The words were barely out of her mouth before she was being escorted from her office by guards and told she was to pack up for another assignment. She was then assigned to a woman whose main job appeared to be bullying her on a daily basis, stressing her out, embarrassing her and psychologically destroying her. "It was so bad that I just couldn't take the bullying anymore, so I just tried to hold myself together. I knew they were going after me, but there was no where for me to go. You can't trust the Civil Rights Office, the lawyers, or even the IG, so what was I supposed to do?" she said. "Their next step was to put me on Leave Without Pay, accuse me of insubordination and then fire me." As a single woman not yet eligible for retirement, her situation is a crime. Interestingly enough, she was replaced by one of the other favorites in the workforce, which is also part of the EPA system.
Another young woman we mentioned in this blog was taken out in handcuffs to spend the night in jail, which is unimaginable. EPA doesn't appear to want to just injure you, they want to destroy you totally so that you can never work again. There was a case years ago in which a male employee testified as a witness in a well-known case against EPA that they lost. The employee was later accused of travel fraud, arrested and spent years in prison. If the President wants to pardon people, he needs to start with him, another victim of EPA's war against their employees.
A long-term female employee was forced out on retirement after using the performance system to do the dirty work and another female ran out the door to another agency, where she said she is "treated with respect" as a professional and human being. "I knew it was bad at EPA, I just didn't realize how bad it was until I left and began to be treated with respect and courtesy as a woman and professional. EPA is bad, really bad." The system employed appears to include performance ratings, use of gossip, innuendo, false statements and charges, forcing the employee to throw up their hands, give up, retire, resign or be fired. A senior female civil rights official, Susan Morris, said, "I asked Ms. Jackson to stop the corruption at EPA that I was learned about and allow me to assist her in making the EPA civil rights program a model for other agencies. Instead, she supported those guilty of violating the laws and regulations and actually rejected an Office of Special Counsel finding that I was retaliated for whistle blowing and should be returned to the agency with full benefits and relief. As a supporter of President Obama and his administration, I find her unwillingness to step up and resolve some of these issues as a strike against him and his administration. I am sure he doesn't just mean his wife and daughters when he is talking about support for women and their rights."
So, what are these women expected to do when they have been abandoned by the President and are already in a hard place? As more women join the fray, we are going to decide what needs to be done to get the Administration and Ms. Jackson's attention. Anyone interested in joining us can write to OccupyEPA@aol.com. Whatever is sent will be kept confidential because we know the EPA culture and environment.
SEC announces new whistleblower award opportunities October 3, 2012
Posted on October 2, 2012 by Richard Renner
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Office of the Whistleblower has today issued seven (7) new Notices of Covered Actions. Each of these notices is an opportunity for any whistleblowers to file a claim. If a whistleblower believes that his or her information contributed to the SEC's collection in the action, then they have ninety (90) days to file a Form WB-APP with the SEC Office of the Whistleblower. For the notices issued today, the deadline to file Form WB-APP is December 31, 2012. The corporations and individuals from whom the SEC recovered the new available funds are Oracle Corporation, Wyeth LLC, Pfizer Inc., Wells Fargo Brokerage Services LLC, SJL Investment Management LLC, Irwin Boock, Stanton B. J. DeFreitas, Nicolette D. Loisel, Roger L. Shoss, Jason C. Wong, Nancy Shao Wen Chu, Elizabeth Tsang, aka Yuen Yee Tsang, Eric Jon Strasser, Shawn Patrick McMurty, and Stanley J. Kowalewski. If you submitted information about any of these penalty payers, now
is the time to consult your lawyer about filing SEC Form WB-APP.
By the way, tomorrow is the last day to file claims for awards against Quantek Asset Management, LLC, Bulltick Capital Markets Holdings, LP, Javier Guerra, and Ralph Patino, James Roland Dial, Evan Nicolas Jarvis, and Alexander W. Ellerman, James Clements and Zeina Smidi, Conrad M. Black, F. David Radler and Hollinger, Inc., New Futures Trading International Corporation and Henry Roche, U.S. Sustainable Energy Corp. and John H. Rivera.
The full list of currently open award opportunities is available in the continuation of this blog post.
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/10/articles/corporate-1/claim-sec-award/sec-announces-new-whistleblower-award-opportunities/index.html
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Office of the Whistleblower has today issued seven (7) new Notices of Covered Actions. Each of these notices is an opportunity for any whistleblowers to file a claim. If a whistleblower believes that his or her information contributed to the SEC's collection in the action, then they have ninety (90) days to file a Form WB-APP with the SEC Office of the Whistleblower. For the notices issued today, the deadline to file Form WB-APP is December 31, 2012. The corporations and individuals from whom the SEC recovered the new available funds are Oracle Corporation, Wyeth LLC, Pfizer Inc., Wells Fargo Brokerage Services LLC, SJL Investment Management LLC, Irwin Boock, Stanton B. J. DeFreitas, Nicolette D. Loisel, Roger L. Shoss, Jason C. Wong, Nancy Shao Wen Chu, Elizabeth Tsang, aka Yuen Yee Tsang, Eric Jon Strasser, Shawn Patrick McMurty, and Stanley J. Kowalewski. If you submitted information about any of these penalty payers, now
is the time to consult your lawyer about filing SEC Form WB-APP.
By the way, tomorrow is the last day to file claims for awards against Quantek Asset Management, LLC, Bulltick Capital Markets Holdings, LP, Javier Guerra, and Ralph Patino, James Roland Dial, Evan Nicolas Jarvis, and Alexander W. Ellerman, James Clements and Zeina Smidi, Conrad M. Black, F. David Radler and Hollinger, Inc., New Futures Trading International Corporation and Henry Roche, U.S. Sustainable Energy Corp. and John H. Rivera.
The full list of currently open award opportunities is available in the continuation of this blog post.
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/10/articles/corporate-1/claim-sec-award/sec-announces-new-whistleblower-award-opportunities/index.html
EPA War on Women (EPA-WOW) October 1, 2012
Listening to the Obama Administration talk about their support for women and children makes our blood boil. If this were the case, how can the Administration continue to allow Administrator Lisa Jackson to retaliate against and fire highly qualified senior professional women after her people set them up? Why would Ms. Jackson put a man with known problems, Rafael DeLeon, in the Civil Rights Director's position after a decade of mismanagement under the former Director Karen Higginbotham. DeLeon not only created the organization to defend the agency against employees and environmental groups in the Office of General Counsel (OGC), but was REMOVED himself as the Director of Human Resources (HR) for violations. He was put out to pasture reporting to his mentor, Ray Spears, the now retired Deputy Chief of Staff, where they proceeded to go after Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo in order to redeem themselves. The HR community managed to get rid of DeLeon, but civil rights employees don't appear to be as important or lucky because they are suffering the consequences of having a lawyer heading up civil rights, another lawyer as the Deputy, and another lawyer heading up the Title VII complaint processing area. Evidently, the administration is not aware of the basic principles of keeping an "arms length" between the resolution and defensive functions. If you really want an effective civil rights program, you don't put the foxes in the hen house. The lawyers in EPA should all be in the Office of General Counsel (OGC) not spread out across the agency in positions for which there are qualified professionals in that field. When the Alternative Dispute Resolution program was in the OGC, EPA employees did not use the program. Ms. Jackson's appointment of Mr. DeLeon is an indication of her position on civil rights.
When Ms. Jackson leaves office, we are going to write her history rather than allow it to be historically incorrect. We allege that: Ms. Jackson has allowed women to be retaliated against and fired for exposing the corruption in EPA; ignored Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation, one against a senior female who blew the whistle on the mismanagement and violations in the Office of Civil Rights (OCR); allowed her now retired Deputy Chief of Staff Ray Spears and Rafael Deleon retaliate against Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo; allowed a young woman to be taken out of her office in handcuffs, jailed overnight, and brought up on criminal charges for educational courses; and rewarded employees who were known to have violated civil rights laws and regulations, while going after those who exposed them. And, the list goes on and on.......
Evidently, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing - which has been a problem for the Obama Administration from the beginning. Someone needs to pick up the phone and tell Ms. Jackson that she has to fix the problems that have grown worse since she took office, particularly for women. It is not enough that she has been loyal to the President in backing off of environmental regulations on his behalf. She has the authority to fix the problems and take corrective action against these victims of discrimination and retaliation. Below is another female victim of the EPA-WOW under her leadership.
When Ms. Jackson leaves office, we are going to write her history rather than allow it to be historically incorrect. We allege that: Ms. Jackson has allowed women to be retaliated against and fired for exposing the corruption in EPA; ignored Office of Special Counsel findings of retaliation, one against a senior female who blew the whistle on the mismanagement and violations in the Office of Civil Rights (OCR); allowed her now retired Deputy Chief of Staff Ray Spears and Rafael Deleon retaliate against Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo; allowed a young woman to be taken out of her office in handcuffs, jailed overnight, and brought up on criminal charges for educational courses; and rewarded employees who were known to have violated civil rights laws and regulations, while going after those who exposed them. And, the list goes on and on.......
Evidently, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing - which has been a problem for the Obama Administration from the beginning. Someone needs to pick up the phone and tell Ms. Jackson that she has to fix the problems that have grown worse since she took office, particularly for women. It is not enough that she has been loyal to the President in backing off of environmental regulations on his behalf. She has the authority to fix the problems and take corrective action against these victims of discrimination and retaliation. Below is another female victim of the EPA-WOW under her leadership.
Women Being Fired at EPA - Where's Lisa Jackson?
When You’ve been Fired…Preparing for the Job Application Process and Interviews by Donna Turnley, HR Consultant
Losing a job and then trying to find one in tough economic times is difficult, especially if you were fired from your previous employer. Nearly all job application systems ask candidates to detail why they left their past employers. If you are like me and were fired from your last job, you may feel fortunate to escape that question during the job application process, but you should be prepared to answer it during job interviews.
What should you say to potential employers if you were fired from your last job? This is when that old adage, “honesty is the best policy” comes into play. If you were fired for cause, do not be defensive. Calmly and thoughtfully describe what happened and why, and what you learned from the experience.
I had an opportunity to practice this myself yesterday during a telephone interview, and realize that I could have been better prepared. When I was asked why I was fired from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after more than 25 years of service, I floundered a bit in delivering a response. My first instinct was to defend the individuals who had set me up to fail as I had done many times during my career with the agency. My response began with a preface that the individuals who work for the U.S. EPA are brilliant professionals who care passionately about protecting and preserving the environment, as if I had to defend their behavior. I eventually admitted though that I was fired after reporting unethical behavior and actions carried out by many of the organization’s senior leaders.
Yes, U.S. EPA senior leaders care passionately about protecting and preserving the environment, but they do not seem to care about people – especially their people, the employees who are also committed to protecting and preserving the environment. U.S. EPA may one day learn that the agency’s articulated mission to “protect human health and the natural environmental upon which life depends”would have more credence if the agency’s senior leaders truly valued their people.
Lessons learned: 1) To be better prepared for the inevitable question on why I was fired; and 2) remind myself more often that my loyalty to the agency should have ended a long time ago.
O.k. fellow HR professionals, it’s your turn. What advice would you provide to me and other individuals who were fired to help us prepare for the inevitable “why did you leave your last job” question?
Losing a job and then trying to find one in tough economic times is difficult, especially if you were fired from your previous employer. Nearly all job application systems ask candidates to detail why they left their past employers. If you are like me and were fired from your last job, you may feel fortunate to escape that question during the job application process, but you should be prepared to answer it during job interviews.
What should you say to potential employers if you were fired from your last job? This is when that old adage, “honesty is the best policy” comes into play. If you were fired for cause, do not be defensive. Calmly and thoughtfully describe what happened and why, and what you learned from the experience.
I had an opportunity to practice this myself yesterday during a telephone interview, and realize that I could have been better prepared. When I was asked why I was fired from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after more than 25 years of service, I floundered a bit in delivering a response. My first instinct was to defend the individuals who had set me up to fail as I had done many times during my career with the agency. My response began with a preface that the individuals who work for the U.S. EPA are brilliant professionals who care passionately about protecting and preserving the environment, as if I had to defend their behavior. I eventually admitted though that I was fired after reporting unethical behavior and actions carried out by many of the organization’s senior leaders.
Yes, U.S. EPA senior leaders care passionately about protecting and preserving the environment, but they do not seem to care about people – especially their people, the employees who are also committed to protecting and preserving the environment. U.S. EPA may one day learn that the agency’s articulated mission to “protect human health and the natural environmental upon which life depends”would have more credence if the agency’s senior leaders truly valued their people.
Lessons learned: 1) To be better prepared for the inevitable question on why I was fired; and 2) remind myself more often that my loyalty to the agency should have ended a long time ago.
O.k. fellow HR professionals, it’s your turn. What advice would you provide to me and other individuals who were fired to help us prepare for the inevitable “why did you leave your last job” question?
No FEAR Act I and II
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) caused the passage of the No FEAR Act by Congress in 2002 after a resounding victory by Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo against the agency for discrimination and after she blew the whistle. The Act increased the accountability of federal agencies by requring that they pay the costs out of their budgets for their retaliatory and discriminatory actions instead of a central government fund set aside for that purpose. It also included other requirements for reporting cases on line and to Congress, along with advising employees of the rights.
In March 2012, protesters marched and rallied against EPA down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC, and in front of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's office, with two environmentally-friendly alpaca and Snowflake the Polar Bear in tow, demanding that EPA Stop the War on Whistleblowers; Stop Polluting Low-Income Communities; Protect the Civil Rights of Federal employees; Protect People, the Planet, not Corporate Profits; and telling Administrator Lisa Jackson to stop allowing the discrimination and retaliation of EPA employees.
Media and a Deloitte Consultant report shows that EPA mismanaged their civil rights program for years by failing to process Title VI environmental complaints, some for up to 15 years; failing to timely process Title VII employee complaints; and failing to submit three years of mandatory reports for Congress. More recently, Congress has been asked to conduct an investigation into the nepotism, their nonuse of the federal merit system, and their ignoring findings of retaliation against EPA by the Office of Special Counsel .
If EPA continues on their noncompliance and violations of civil rights and whistleblowing laws and regulation even after the passage of No FEAR Act I, another law will be passed by Congress - the No FEAR Act II, and agencies throughout the government will again have EPA and Administrator Jackson to thank for increasing their responsibilities and accountability. Jackson previously worked at EPA in New York, so that her loyalty appears to be with the EPA insiders.
In March 2012, protesters marched and rallied against EPA down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC, and in front of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's office, with two environmentally-friendly alpaca and Snowflake the Polar Bear in tow, demanding that EPA Stop the War on Whistleblowers; Stop Polluting Low-Income Communities; Protect the Civil Rights of Federal employees; Protect People, the Planet, not Corporate Profits; and telling Administrator Lisa Jackson to stop allowing the discrimination and retaliation of EPA employees.
Media and a Deloitte Consultant report shows that EPA mismanaged their civil rights program for years by failing to process Title VI environmental complaints, some for up to 15 years; failing to timely process Title VII employee complaints; and failing to submit three years of mandatory reports for Congress. More recently, Congress has been asked to conduct an investigation into the nepotism, their nonuse of the federal merit system, and their ignoring findings of retaliation against EPA by the Office of Special Counsel .
If EPA continues on their noncompliance and violations of civil rights and whistleblowing laws and regulation even after the passage of No FEAR Act I, another law will be passed by Congress - the No FEAR Act II, and agencies throughout the government will again have EPA and Administrator Jackson to thank for increasing their responsibilities and accountability. Jackson previously worked at EPA in New York, so that her loyalty appears to be with the EPA insiders.
Whistleblowers Victory September 27, 2012
National Whistleblowers Center
3238 P Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20007
http://www.whistleblowers.org
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Lindsey M. Williams
(202) 342-1903
lmw@whistleblowers.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NWC and No FEAR Coalition Announce Endorsement of Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act Washington, D.C. September 27, 2012 — The National Whistleblowers Center and the No FEAR Coalition announce their support for the immediate passage of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) for federal employee whistleblowers. The decision to support the Senate version (S. 743) of the WPEA came after the Senate removed a final poison pill from the bill.
Last week, the Senate removed the controversial summary judgment provision from the WPEA. The provision would have given the Administrative Judges of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) the power to summarily dismiss whistleblower cases without a hearing. The NWC, No FEAR Coalition and other whistleblower groups
argued that the summary judgment provision would be harmful to federal employees by radically increasing costs for whistleblowers, undermining their ability to reach settlements, and delaying final decisions. An NWC blog postingprovides a more thorough analysis of the dangers of the summary judgment provision.
Stephen M. Kohn, Executive Director of the National Whistleblowers Center, made the following statement: The revised Senate bill (S. 743) is far from what federal employees were promised, but it is finally a step forward. Over the past two years, the NWC has vigorously campaigned for the elimination of all poison pills from the bill.
The final poison pill was summary judgment, which has now been removed from the proposed legislation. We are highly encouraged that Congress has taken the
first steps in providing fair and adequate protection for federal employees by fixing the definition of a whistleblower disclosure and enhancing the remedies available to employees who suffer retaliation. Unfortunately, even after this law is passed, federal employees will have a long road ahead of them before they reach parity with their brothers and sisters in the private sector. In the next Congress, the NWC will continue its campaign for full and effective protection for federal employee whistleblowers, including full court access, appellate rights and closure of the loopholes that silence hundred of thousands of employees working in national security agencies. The WPEA is a step in right direction, and we need to continue to move forward. The NWC urges Congress to immediately pass the WPEA when it returns to session.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President of the No FEAR Coalition, stated the following: The summary judgment provisions of Senate bill (S.743) would have seriously
undermined the due process provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. To honor the sacrifice of the civil rights movement, the No FEAR Coalition, NWC, Net-WE, and OccupyWashingtonDC organized demonstrations, calling for Congress to remove the summary judgment provisions of the WPEA. The MSPB has a long history of
victimizing federal employees who seek justice by ruling nearly 97% in favor of federal agencies. Providing summary judgment authority to the MSPB would have
been the death knell for any semblance of justice. The No FEAR Coalition calls upon Congress and the public to fight for more protections for victims of civil rights abuse and whistleblower retaliation. We also call upon Congress to hold hearings to determine if government agencies are in compliance with the No FEAR law and to pass No FEAR II in the next Congress. We urge civil rights and whistleblower groups to support the WPEA and to continue to struggle for a federal workplace where democratic and human rights principles will be honored.
For more information about the legislative history of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act please read the NWC’s position letter on their website.
3238 P Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20007
http://www.whistleblowers.org
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Lindsey M. Williams
(202) 342-1903
lmw@whistleblowers.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NWC and No FEAR Coalition Announce Endorsement of Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act Washington, D.C. September 27, 2012 — The National Whistleblowers Center and the No FEAR Coalition announce their support for the immediate passage of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) for federal employee whistleblowers. The decision to support the Senate version (S. 743) of the WPEA came after the Senate removed a final poison pill from the bill.
Last week, the Senate removed the controversial summary judgment provision from the WPEA. The provision would have given the Administrative Judges of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) the power to summarily dismiss whistleblower cases without a hearing. The NWC, No FEAR Coalition and other whistleblower groups
argued that the summary judgment provision would be harmful to federal employees by radically increasing costs for whistleblowers, undermining their ability to reach settlements, and delaying final decisions. An NWC blog postingprovides a more thorough analysis of the dangers of the summary judgment provision.
Stephen M. Kohn, Executive Director of the National Whistleblowers Center, made the following statement: The revised Senate bill (S. 743) is far from what federal employees were promised, but it is finally a step forward. Over the past two years, the NWC has vigorously campaigned for the elimination of all poison pills from the bill.
The final poison pill was summary judgment, which has now been removed from the proposed legislation. We are highly encouraged that Congress has taken the
first steps in providing fair and adequate protection for federal employees by fixing the definition of a whistleblower disclosure and enhancing the remedies available to employees who suffer retaliation. Unfortunately, even after this law is passed, federal employees will have a long road ahead of them before they reach parity with their brothers and sisters in the private sector. In the next Congress, the NWC will continue its campaign for full and effective protection for federal employee whistleblowers, including full court access, appellate rights and closure of the loopholes that silence hundred of thousands of employees working in national security agencies. The WPEA is a step in right direction, and we need to continue to move forward. The NWC urges Congress to immediately pass the WPEA when it returns to session.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President of the No FEAR Coalition, stated the following: The summary judgment provisions of Senate bill (S.743) would have seriously
undermined the due process provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. To honor the sacrifice of the civil rights movement, the No FEAR Coalition, NWC, Net-WE, and OccupyWashingtonDC organized demonstrations, calling for Congress to remove the summary judgment provisions of the WPEA. The MSPB has a long history of
victimizing federal employees who seek justice by ruling nearly 97% in favor of federal agencies. Providing summary judgment authority to the MSPB would have
been the death knell for any semblance of justice. The No FEAR Coalition calls upon Congress and the public to fight for more protections for victims of civil rights abuse and whistleblower retaliation. We also call upon Congress to hold hearings to determine if government agencies are in compliance with the No FEAR law and to pass No FEAR II in the next Congress. We urge civil rights and whistleblower groups to support the WPEA and to continue to struggle for a federal workplace where democratic and human rights principles will be honored.
For more information about the legislative history of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act please read the NWC’s position letter on their website.
EPA NEPOTISM REPORTED To CONGRESS September 27, 2012
Cronyism, favoritism and nepotism have been around for centuries and are a part of our political system. Before taking office, the President-elect must bring in over 6,000 new appointees to hold positions throughout his administration. Competence may not always be the guiding principle, but more likely jobs will be filled based on politics and loyalty to the candidate and his/her position on issues. As the saying goes, "A man stands where he sits," and that's their job (male and female) to do what they are supposed to do in their position while their party is in office. The political appointees, who head up the various agencies, then bring in their own people to fill key positions or the President will recommend people to fill those positions.
The Civil Service Reform Act passed in 1883 was in large part an attempt to stop the spoils system of patronage jobs, or jobs filled in support of political parties.
Slowly, the Federal workforce hiring was based on the merit system and the Hatch Act of 1939 prevented civil servants from engaging in political activities while performing their duties. Federal employees are aware of numerous occasions when political appointees "burrow" into positions during one administration so that they remain into the next. This is generally frowned upon because their loyalty will be to the positions held by the party that put them into the position as a political appointee and not the new administration. In addition, these individuals usually burrow in at high grades, which antagonizes employees who have spent years earning their grades.
Recently, the Department of Justice (DOJ) was found guilty of engaging in long-term and rampant nepotism, with some of their top officials involved in the misconduct.
Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee overseeing the DOJ budget, Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA), alerted the DOJ Inspector General (IG)
of complaints he received in 2010 from a former employee who blew the whistle. In his statement after the IG report was issued, Wolf said, “The report …..is alarming, especially given that the department has twice been warned about these illegal practices before.” He then called for punishment of the “nepotism ring” to the full extent of the law. Senator Grassley an strong advocate for federal whistleblowers told The Hill, "It is troubling to me how employees with the Department colluded and schemed to hire one another's relatives in order to avoid rules against nepotism," and assured everyone that Congress would be looking into the matter. As managers know, without appropriate penalties, all of the "ism," including nepotism will continue to occu, not only in DOJ, but throughout government agencies. Naming names and writing them on the wall is the only effective means of determining if any positive actions were taken for corrective action. Some of the leading actors and actresses at DOJ reported by Main Justice in their article are: Edward Hamilton, Sr., Director of JMD's Facilities and Administrative Services Staff (FASS); Michael Clay, Deputy Director of FASS; Rodney E. Markham, the Human Resources Director; Jeanarta McEachron, Assistant Director of HR; Nancy Horkan, adviser to Mari Santangelo, the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for HR and Administration; HR Operations Chief, LaTonya Gamble, and Assistant Director HR Pamela Cabell-Edelen.
The most disturbing aspect of this is the fact that it is happening in the Department of Justice and involves the people who are hired to ensure that the personnel laws and regulations are followed throughout DOJ. If this is what is the HR leadership is doing, it is probably right to assume it goes on throughout the Department and other agencies. Congress has been asked to require investigations into other agencies throughout the government to determine the extent of nepotism and other problems associated with it, including retaliation against whistleblowers who expose the corruption, particularly occurring within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under the leadership of Administrator Lisa Jackson.
In an analysis of hiring practices at the U.S. EPA in 2006, it was found that EPA had filled a substantial number of the approximately 1,300 vacancies annually non-competitively, or by going around the merit system. This not only affects the employees within the agency, but prevents consideration of veterans and others who are in dire need of jobs and who may be qualified. In a subsequent review, it was found that senior officials in the EPA Headquarters were bringing their children into the Summer Intern Program to reap the benefits, instead of hiring disadvantaged youth in the Washington, DC area. The children of the current Office of Civil Rights Director, Rafael DeLeon, and former Director, Karen Higginbotham, along with other senior manager's children, have been hired into the program for years. In addition, numerous relatives and "friends of friends" have been hired throughout the agency, so that there is a known "buddy system" that prevails. While some of these individuals may be competent and qualified for the positions, favoritism, cronyism and nepotism weaken the morale in government service and diminish the integrity of the government as a fair and equal employment opportunity employer and at a high cost to the public and taxpayers.
When an employee is in a position waiting for a promotion or an opportunity to come along for years and someone's unqualified relative is slipped into a position that could and should be filled with an experienced, trained and qualified person, everyone suffers. Employees become jaded, morale goes down, along with productivity and commitment to public service. When senior officials’ (some earning up to $170,000) fill summer jobs with their children, instead of the less advantaged youth, it passes on corruption. When whistle blowers are retaliated against and suffer for exposing misconduct, while the perpetrators are rewarded or go unpunished for violating the laws and regulations, our democracy suffers.
We believe that Congress needs to require the Inspector General in all of the Executive Departments and agencies to conduct investigations on nepotism and favoritsm so the extent of the problem can be determined and eliminated, particularly during these hard times when the “haves” continue to take advantage of the Americans who have not been as fortunate. EPA should be first on the list of the agencies investigated because it is well known by employees that favoritism, cronyism and nepotism have been institutionalized in the agency. If you have further information you would like us to pass on to Congress, be sure to write us at: OccupyEPA@aol.com.
The Civil Service Reform Act passed in 1883 was in large part an attempt to stop the spoils system of patronage jobs, or jobs filled in support of political parties.
Slowly, the Federal workforce hiring was based on the merit system and the Hatch Act of 1939 prevented civil servants from engaging in political activities while performing their duties. Federal employees are aware of numerous occasions when political appointees "burrow" into positions during one administration so that they remain into the next. This is generally frowned upon because their loyalty will be to the positions held by the party that put them into the position as a political appointee and not the new administration. In addition, these individuals usually burrow in at high grades, which antagonizes employees who have spent years earning their grades.
Recently, the Department of Justice (DOJ) was found guilty of engaging in long-term and rampant nepotism, with some of their top officials involved in the misconduct.
Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee overseeing the DOJ budget, Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA), alerted the DOJ Inspector General (IG)
of complaints he received in 2010 from a former employee who blew the whistle. In his statement after the IG report was issued, Wolf said, “The report …..is alarming, especially given that the department has twice been warned about these illegal practices before.” He then called for punishment of the “nepotism ring” to the full extent of the law. Senator Grassley an strong advocate for federal whistleblowers told The Hill, "It is troubling to me how employees with the Department colluded and schemed to hire one another's relatives in order to avoid rules against nepotism," and assured everyone that Congress would be looking into the matter. As managers know, without appropriate penalties, all of the "ism," including nepotism will continue to occu, not only in DOJ, but throughout government agencies. Naming names and writing them on the wall is the only effective means of determining if any positive actions were taken for corrective action. Some of the leading actors and actresses at DOJ reported by Main Justice in their article are: Edward Hamilton, Sr., Director of JMD's Facilities and Administrative Services Staff (FASS); Michael Clay, Deputy Director of FASS; Rodney E. Markham, the Human Resources Director; Jeanarta McEachron, Assistant Director of HR; Nancy Horkan, adviser to Mari Santangelo, the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for HR and Administration; HR Operations Chief, LaTonya Gamble, and Assistant Director HR Pamela Cabell-Edelen.
The most disturbing aspect of this is the fact that it is happening in the Department of Justice and involves the people who are hired to ensure that the personnel laws and regulations are followed throughout DOJ. If this is what is the HR leadership is doing, it is probably right to assume it goes on throughout the Department and other agencies. Congress has been asked to require investigations into other agencies throughout the government to determine the extent of nepotism and other problems associated with it, including retaliation against whistleblowers who expose the corruption, particularly occurring within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under the leadership of Administrator Lisa Jackson.
In an analysis of hiring practices at the U.S. EPA in 2006, it was found that EPA had filled a substantial number of the approximately 1,300 vacancies annually non-competitively, or by going around the merit system. This not only affects the employees within the agency, but prevents consideration of veterans and others who are in dire need of jobs and who may be qualified. In a subsequent review, it was found that senior officials in the EPA Headquarters were bringing their children into the Summer Intern Program to reap the benefits, instead of hiring disadvantaged youth in the Washington, DC area. The children of the current Office of Civil Rights Director, Rafael DeLeon, and former Director, Karen Higginbotham, along with other senior manager's children, have been hired into the program for years. In addition, numerous relatives and "friends of friends" have been hired throughout the agency, so that there is a known "buddy system" that prevails. While some of these individuals may be competent and qualified for the positions, favoritism, cronyism and nepotism weaken the morale in government service and diminish the integrity of the government as a fair and equal employment opportunity employer and at a high cost to the public and taxpayers.
When an employee is in a position waiting for a promotion or an opportunity to come along for years and someone's unqualified relative is slipped into a position that could and should be filled with an experienced, trained and qualified person, everyone suffers. Employees become jaded, morale goes down, along with productivity and commitment to public service. When senior officials’ (some earning up to $170,000) fill summer jobs with their children, instead of the less advantaged youth, it passes on corruption. When whistle blowers are retaliated against and suffer for exposing misconduct, while the perpetrators are rewarded or go unpunished for violating the laws and regulations, our democracy suffers.
We believe that Congress needs to require the Inspector General in all of the Executive Departments and agencies to conduct investigations on nepotism and favoritsm so the extent of the problem can be determined and eliminated, particularly during these hard times when the “haves” continue to take advantage of the Americans who have not been as fortunate. EPA should be first on the list of the agencies investigated because it is well known by employees that favoritism, cronyism and nepotism have been institutionalized in the agency. If you have further information you would like us to pass on to Congress, be sure to write us at: OccupyEPA@aol.com.
Nepotism, Favoritism and the Family Business September 10, 2012
The Department of Justice (DOJ) was caught engaging in nepotism (see the Office of Inspector General Report below) or using the patronage system of old to enhance the family business. See the report that was just distributed by the Coalition for Change (C4C) below.
Does anyone believe that DOJ is the only Federal Executive Department or agency in which Federal managers and political appointees are hiring their own children or friends? The Environmental Protection Agency needs to be investigated on their recruitment and hiring practices and what they do to the employees who protest. We believe that a government-wide investigation will show that agencies are giving lip-service to the Merit System and that nepotism is part of the Federal government manager's family business.
See Report Regarding Investigation of Improper Hiring Practices in the Justice Management Division
at http://coalition4change.org/report%20dojjmd.pdf.
Does anyone believe that DOJ is the only Federal Executive Department or agency in which Federal managers and political appointees are hiring their own children or friends? The Environmental Protection Agency needs to be investigated on their recruitment and hiring practices and what they do to the employees who protest. We believe that a government-wide investigation will show that agencies are giving lip-service to the Merit System and that nepotism is part of the Federal government manager's family business.
See Report Regarding Investigation of Improper Hiring Practices in the Justice Management Division
at http://coalition4change.org/report%20dojjmd.pdf.
It's a Disgrace!
There is something terribly wrong with our Federal government when no one is
listening or cares! Our democracy requires that we have the freedom to protest when things are not right, publicly and internally. Government employees who are willing to step up, file whistleblower complaints or engage in protected activity must be protected from the management group that has all the power and taxpayer's money to destroy them. There is a case rattling around right now in EPA that shows the extent of the corruption and internal pollution. The joke is on the employees who believe that they have a place to go to be protected there. Will they go to their union? How about going to Rafael DeLeon, the OCR Director? Administrator's Office? Use the grievance system, complaint system, or go to the Inspector General? What workforce crime can a woman be charged with that would have her taken out in handcuffs, carted off to the court, and put in jail overnight? Stay tuned over the next few months......... |
The War on Women in the Federal Government
|
THE "GOTCHA" GAME AUGUST 29, 2012
Federal employees need to be aware of the games played and systems in place that cause their total undoing and destruction and demise, particularly if they have exposed management in anyway. Training on what Federal employees can and cannot do is usually not comprehensive enough to keep them out of serious trouble.
Using government credit cards for anything unauthorized is one of the main gotcha games used by agencies. It can either lead to the employee simply paying the amount back if s/he is on the right side of management, or it can lead to being taken out in handcuffs and arrested if you are one of those out of favor. Time and attendance abuse is another area that employees must watch carefully. Some employees can and do abuse the system, with no action taken against them, while others are on their way out the door for doing the same thing. Affairs and misuse of government equipment and time can also have serious consequences.
There was a case years ago in which a senior male supervisor (Bruce) was having an affair with a female subordinate (Sarah). At first, Sarah didn't appreciate Bruce's sexual advances and mentioned it to his Deputy (Mary). Sarah must have changed her mind somewhere along the way, but she supposedly kept the affair a secret. Her husband was in the same workplace, while Bruce's wife was divorcing him. Emails were exchanged on government computers between her and Bruce about their trysts; eventually Sarah's husband found out about the affair; and as they say, all hell broke loose. When that happened, Bruce learned that Mary was aware of the affair and started to harass her, so she filed a sexual harassment complaint against him as a third party being impact upon because of his affair with Sarah. Bruce also filed a race discrimination complaint against the agency stating that as a white male he was being treated differently than a black male supervisor who was also having an affair. But, that doesn't fly because he was guilty of having an affair with a subordinate that impacted on the other employees, retaliated against his Deputy, and used government equipment and time to carry on the affair. Eventually, an investigation was conducted to determine if the Black male supervisor was having an affair that impacted on his responsibility, but nothing was found and no further action was taken against him.
Bruce not only had a history of affairs in the workplace during this career, but had a vindictive nature, often going after strong women. So, no one was surprised that he was finally caught, but they were surprised that his father, another well-known senior official, was unable to save him. We never heard what happened to Sarah's marriage or what action was taken against her, if any. She may have said that Bruce forced her into the affair, which could be verified by her statements to his Deputy. Supervisor's responsibilities under the sexual harassment regulations are far greater than those for peers having affairs because supervisors have the authority to take action against employees. The end of the story is that Bruce was fired and was last seen selling products. (Note: the names were changed to protect the parties.)
More later..........
Using government credit cards for anything unauthorized is one of the main gotcha games used by agencies. It can either lead to the employee simply paying the amount back if s/he is on the right side of management, or it can lead to being taken out in handcuffs and arrested if you are one of those out of favor. Time and attendance abuse is another area that employees must watch carefully. Some employees can and do abuse the system, with no action taken against them, while others are on their way out the door for doing the same thing. Affairs and misuse of government equipment and time can also have serious consequences.
There was a case years ago in which a senior male supervisor (Bruce) was having an affair with a female subordinate (Sarah). At first, Sarah didn't appreciate Bruce's sexual advances and mentioned it to his Deputy (Mary). Sarah must have changed her mind somewhere along the way, but she supposedly kept the affair a secret. Her husband was in the same workplace, while Bruce's wife was divorcing him. Emails were exchanged on government computers between her and Bruce about their trysts; eventually Sarah's husband found out about the affair; and as they say, all hell broke loose. When that happened, Bruce learned that Mary was aware of the affair and started to harass her, so she filed a sexual harassment complaint against him as a third party being impact upon because of his affair with Sarah. Bruce also filed a race discrimination complaint against the agency stating that as a white male he was being treated differently than a black male supervisor who was also having an affair. But, that doesn't fly because he was guilty of having an affair with a subordinate that impacted on the other employees, retaliated against his Deputy, and used government equipment and time to carry on the affair. Eventually, an investigation was conducted to determine if the Black male supervisor was having an affair that impacted on his responsibility, but nothing was found and no further action was taken against him.
Bruce not only had a history of affairs in the workplace during this career, but had a vindictive nature, often going after strong women. So, no one was surprised that he was finally caught, but they were surprised that his father, another well-known senior official, was unable to save him. We never heard what happened to Sarah's marriage or what action was taken against her, if any. She may have said that Bruce forced her into the affair, which could be verified by her statements to his Deputy. Supervisor's responsibilities under the sexual harassment regulations are far greater than those for peers having affairs because supervisors have the authority to take action against employees. The end of the story is that Bruce was fired and was last seen selling products. (Note: the names were changed to protect the parties.)
More later..........
BIG COAL SEIZING LAND August 21, 2012
When is a highway really a coal mine? Right now, Big Coal is trying to push through a highway permit in Southwest Virginia that would let them seize private land, skirt environmental protections for local communities, and put communities at risk.
Tell the Federal Highway Administration to look at all the environmental and community impacts of this project before they make a decision - I did! Find out more and send your message here: http://action.sierraclub.org/CoalfieldsExpressway To take action on this issue, click on the link: http://action.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=5aMy7ZgZWOkDIMjyQu0TpA&id=9253
Tell the Federal Highway Administration to look at all the environmental and community impacts of this project before they make a decision - I did! Find out more and send your message here: http://action.sierraclub.org/CoalfieldsExpressway To take action on this issue, click on the link: http://action.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=5aMy7ZgZWOkDIMjyQu0TpA&id=9253
Female fire fighter fights different fight Posted August 10, 2012
Alicia Dabney: Forest ignores her claims
August 07, 2012 9:50 AM
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Here are your petition stats: President Barack Obama: Reinstate Alicia Dabney 36 Signatures This Week 137 so Far - Keep it Up!from Twitter
Need 100 more signatures still needed to reach our goal
Supporters Thanks,
The Change.org Team
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.recorderonline.com/news/editor-53531-female-fight.html
Advocate says sexual harassment is widespread
Forest Service target of complaint
August 08, 2012 8:40 AM
http://www.recorderonline.com/news/women-53550-manage-donnelly.html
Harassment allegations: Female firefighter suing U.S. Forest Service
http://www.kget.com/news/local/story/Harassment-allegations-Female-firefighter-suing-U/TPG6JbWJbUed9vGHC_U9bA.cspx
August 07, 2012 9:50 AM
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Here are your petition stats: President Barack Obama: Reinstate Alicia Dabney 36 Signatures This Week 137 so Far - Keep it Up!from Twitter
Need 100 more signatures still needed to reach our goal
Supporters Thanks,
The Change.org Team
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.recorderonline.com/news/editor-53531-female-fight.html
Advocate says sexual harassment is widespread
Forest Service target of complaint
August 08, 2012 8:40 AM
http://www.recorderonline.com/news/women-53550-manage-donnelly.html
Harassment allegations: Female firefighter suing U.S. Forest Service
http://www.kget.com/news/local/story/Harassment-allegations-Female-firefighter-suing-U/TPG6JbWJbUed9vGHC_U9bA.cspx
SIGN PETITION on Behalf of Alicia Dabney, American Indian Female in USDA August 7, 2012
Dear Friends,
What country are we in when our women can be treated in the most atrocious manner, then fired for defending herself while the perpetrators are free from a serious investigation and penalities? Where is the Inspector General's Office? Where is the Civil Rights Office? Where are the leaders in USDA and Forest Service? Where are the Native American organizations? Where are the women's organizations? Alicia Dabney has been trying to get someone in the USDA or the Obama administration to listen to her. They did, then decided to fire her. We will by first signing the petition as indicated below. Join us please.
Please sign the petition to help Alicia Dabney. Alicia is a Native-American firefighter who has faced, perhaps one of the most atrocious cases of discrimination within the US Federal government. Ms. Dabney works for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service in California. On August 3, 2012, Alicia was fired after the USDA ignored numerous complaints and allegations of physical and sexual assault. Her male co-workers have physically and emotionally demeaned her by calling her a 'whore' after breaking into her hotel room where they attempted to rape her. Please go to: http://www.change.org/petitions/president-barack-obama-reinstate-alicia-dabney
and click on the youtube revealing one of Alicia's supervisors ordering her to come to his hotel room.
As a result of Alicia's courage and determination to end the silence of sexual harassment in the American workplace, she received a 2012 No FEAR Hero Award.
Please circulate widely and ask everyone you know to sign this important petition.
What country are we in when our women can be treated in the most atrocious manner, then fired for defending herself while the perpetrators are free from a serious investigation and penalities? Where is the Inspector General's Office? Where is the Civil Rights Office? Where are the leaders in USDA and Forest Service? Where are the Native American organizations? Where are the women's organizations? Alicia Dabney has been trying to get someone in the USDA or the Obama administration to listen to her. They did, then decided to fire her. We will by first signing the petition as indicated below. Join us please.
Please sign the petition to help Alicia Dabney. Alicia is a Native-American firefighter who has faced, perhaps one of the most atrocious cases of discrimination within the US Federal government. Ms. Dabney works for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service in California. On August 3, 2012, Alicia was fired after the USDA ignored numerous complaints and allegations of physical and sexual assault. Her male co-workers have physically and emotionally demeaned her by calling her a 'whore' after breaking into her hotel room where they attempted to rape her. Please go to: http://www.change.org/petitions/president-barack-obama-reinstate-alicia-dabney
and click on the youtube revealing one of Alicia's supervisors ordering her to come to his hotel room.
As a result of Alicia's courage and determination to end the silence of sexual harassment in the American workplace, she received a 2012 No FEAR Hero Award.
Please circulate widely and ask everyone you know to sign this important petition.
Hot Off the Press - EPA Security Breach August 2, 2012
The article on "Our Government is Running Amuck!" below was just hot off the press when we were interrupted by the latest breach in security at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We hate to say that we told you so......
The latest debacle at EPA is a serious security breach that exposed at least 8,000 individuals, including current and retired employees. Not surprisingly, EPA is not freely providing much information, except that they just notified everyone. This is what is known as "months late and a dollar and sense short".
The breach occurred four months ago in March, so what have they been doing since they learned of it? Probably ducking for cover or covering their ducks.
We contacted a number of EPA retirees who said they haven't heard a thing about a breach or whether their records were involved. Their individual information containing such things as banking and routing numbers from a database in Raleigh may have been compromised, but they will just have to watch the news and check their bank accounts!
Can the Obama administration stand much more of this? Stayed tuned........
The latest debacle at EPA is a serious security breach that exposed at least 8,000 individuals, including current and retired employees. Not surprisingly, EPA is not freely providing much information, except that they just notified everyone. This is what is known as "months late and a dollar and sense short".
The breach occurred four months ago in March, so what have they been doing since they learned of it? Probably ducking for cover or covering their ducks.
We contacted a number of EPA retirees who said they haven't heard a thing about a breach or whether their records were involved. Their individual information containing such things as banking and routing numbers from a database in Raleigh may have been compromised, but they will just have to watch the news and check their bank accounts!
Can the Obama administration stand much more of this? Stayed tuned........
Our Government is Running Amuck! August 2, 2012
AMUCK: In a blind, heedless manner; in a frenzy to do harm
In over 32 years with the Federal government, I don't think I have ever been more disappointed in or disgusted with our government officials. I thought some of them in previous administrations were as bad as it could get. While President Obama is running for a second term and engaging in heavy-duty campaigning against Mitt Romney, his political appointees seem to be running amuck. They are either oblivious, not paying attention, being ill-advised, don't know what they are doing, or just don't care!
Currently, all eyes are on the General Services Administration (GSA) and their $823,000 conference debacle, along with the $40 million in bonuses given to senior officials including many of the culprits in the fiasco. Then there is the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and a must-read memoir by Sibel Edmonds on our national security or lack thereof, entitled, "Classified Woman." Add in the more scintillating sex scandal of the Secret Service agents still rattling around, which shows that even the President is not exempt from the ineptitude and scandalous attitudes in his administration. We can't forget the scandals simmering in the Department of Justice (DOJ), while their senior officials hire their children (nepotism). Of course, GSA is at it again with their latest "training on credit card use" conference, the Department of Agriculture has an inability to handle the Black Farmer protests and there is the case of Alicia Dabney about the sexual abuse she has endured in the National Park Service (NPS). There is the smaller-agency scandal within the Small Business Administration's (SBA) in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in which investigators uncovered a fleecing of federal disaster assistance and widespread fraud. And, we must not forget the never-ending saga of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that includes their frenzied attempt to cover up the years of senior officials doing the wrong things. Just imagine officials in the other agencies running for cover before their own nepotism, travel and bonuses are examined.
At EPA, employees protested against the former Director of Civil Rights, Karen Higginbotham, receiving the Administrator's (Lisa P. Jackson) Manager of the Year Award and a subsequent "bonus" of $8,000. She received this bonus after which it was found that she mismanaged the OCR for years (see Deloitte Consulting Report on this site), and violated the civil rights laws and regulations. Instead of taking appropriate action, the Administrator transferred Ms. Higginbotham to another position in her office and replaced her with Rafael DeLeon, again under protest. Mr. DeLeon had complaints filed against him when he was previously in the OCR and was removed from his position as the Director of Human Resources for violations. After he was transferred out of that office to report directly to his mentor, Ray Spears, he engaged in actions to remove Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo from EPA. In early 2000, Dr. Coleman-Adebayo won a jury trial against EPA, was instrumental in assisting in the passage of the 2002 No Fear Act by Congress, and recently published her book, "No Fear - A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA." This book is another must-read because it shows the lengths a small agency will go to stifle criticism of policies and practices. Finally, we cannot forget Alicia Dabney, an American Indian woman who has been seriously abused at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (DA), National Park Service (NPS).
The Department of Agriculture has been unable to get a handle on their civil rights program for decades. At one recent protest several months ago, a number of senior officials came out of the Agriculture headquarter's building in Washington, DC to talk to protesters. The protest was led by Lawrence Lucas on behalf of Black farmers and included a group of women who came from as far as California to plead their cases of abuse at the hands of Agriculture employees and management. After a short discussion, the insiders marched back into the Federal facility and the Black farmers and women continue to protest. Below is the latest example of a government agency that has run amuck.
The email below is being distributed throughout the country on behalf of Alicia Dabney, on the sexual harassment she suffered at U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Park Service. Also, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjZwLEFLAhI&feature=youtube_gdata_player and read her letter on this site.
Alicia Dabney was terminated from the Forest Service today. The charges are ridiculous and it is clearly reprisal for protected activity. Last week Alicia participated in the 6th, (yes number 6) conduct investigation based on her allegations of physical assault, sexual assault, and other complaints of harassment. This investigation is being conducted by OIG and is about the attempted rape incident on the fire (that we reported a year ago) and the incident at the March 2011 Apprentice Academy when the guys surrounded her and one pulled her down on his lap. They still haven't investigated the sexual phone calls or Danny trying to break into her hotel room, so we told it again to these investigators. Alicia is also starting her 5th EEO investigation this week. That makes 11 investigations the Agency has put her through since May 2011, and no one has been fired for these incidents EXCEPT ALICIA. (No Mr. Secretary, Tyler Castle was not fired for his assault upon Alicia - look it up.) The men who attempted to rape her, break into her room, publicly called her a whore, made her urinate in front of the other men, made her tell them when her period started, etc. etc. etc. are all working - but ALICIA HAS BEEN TERMINATED even though she was at the top of her class at the Academy, always had successful performance evaluations, and never had a misconduct issue. Numerous male employees cannot claim that (Ron Booker for example) and they are still working. Enough said.
It is really not enough said or done. Where are all the women's groups and Native American tribes that should be coming to her rescue. And, more importantly, where is the President Obama's and his political appointee's support for women that is being touted daily during this election? What is the "Council on Women & Girls" created by President Obama doing to stop some of these clearly abusive actions within government agencies? We asked before and will ask again - how would you like your mother, sister, daughter or granddaughter treated to this type of disgusting behavior in our Federal government and work place?
Listen to what Alicia Dabney has to put up with at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjZwLEFLAhI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Currently, all eyes are on the General Services Administration (GSA) and their $823,000 conference debacle, along with the $40 million in bonuses given to senior officials including many of the culprits in the fiasco. Then there is the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and a must-read memoir by Sibel Edmonds on our national security or lack thereof, entitled, "Classified Woman." Add in the more scintillating sex scandal of the Secret Service agents still rattling around, which shows that even the President is not exempt from the ineptitude and scandalous attitudes in his administration. We can't forget the scandals simmering in the Department of Justice (DOJ), while their senior officials hire their children (nepotism). Of course, GSA is at it again with their latest "training on credit card use" conference, the Department of Agriculture has an inability to handle the Black Farmer protests and there is the case of Alicia Dabney about the sexual abuse she has endured in the National Park Service (NPS). There is the smaller-agency scandal within the Small Business Administration's (SBA) in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in which investigators uncovered a fleecing of federal disaster assistance and widespread fraud. And, we must not forget the never-ending saga of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that includes their frenzied attempt to cover up the years of senior officials doing the wrong things. Just imagine officials in the other agencies running for cover before their own nepotism, travel and bonuses are examined.
At EPA, employees protested against the former Director of Civil Rights, Karen Higginbotham, receiving the Administrator's (Lisa P. Jackson) Manager of the Year Award and a subsequent "bonus" of $8,000. She received this bonus after which it was found that she mismanaged the OCR for years (see Deloitte Consulting Report on this site), and violated the civil rights laws and regulations. Instead of taking appropriate action, the Administrator transferred Ms. Higginbotham to another position in her office and replaced her with Rafael DeLeon, again under protest. Mr. DeLeon had complaints filed against him when he was previously in the OCR and was removed from his position as the Director of Human Resources for violations. After he was transferred out of that office to report directly to his mentor, Ray Spears, he engaged in actions to remove Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo from EPA. In early 2000, Dr. Coleman-Adebayo won a jury trial against EPA, was instrumental in assisting in the passage of the 2002 No Fear Act by Congress, and recently published her book, "No Fear - A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA." This book is another must-read because it shows the lengths a small agency will go to stifle criticism of policies and practices. Finally, we cannot forget Alicia Dabney, an American Indian woman who has been seriously abused at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (DA), National Park Service (NPS).
The Department of Agriculture has been unable to get a handle on their civil rights program for decades. At one recent protest several months ago, a number of senior officials came out of the Agriculture headquarter's building in Washington, DC to talk to protesters. The protest was led by Lawrence Lucas on behalf of Black farmers and included a group of women who came from as far as California to plead their cases of abuse at the hands of Agriculture employees and management. After a short discussion, the insiders marched back into the Federal facility and the Black farmers and women continue to protest. Below is the latest example of a government agency that has run amuck.
The email below is being distributed throughout the country on behalf of Alicia Dabney, on the sexual harassment she suffered at U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Park Service. Also, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjZwLEFLAhI&feature=youtube_gdata_player and read her letter on this site.
Alicia Dabney was terminated from the Forest Service today. The charges are ridiculous and it is clearly reprisal for protected activity. Last week Alicia participated in the 6th, (yes number 6) conduct investigation based on her allegations of physical assault, sexual assault, and other complaints of harassment. This investigation is being conducted by OIG and is about the attempted rape incident on the fire (that we reported a year ago) and the incident at the March 2011 Apprentice Academy when the guys surrounded her and one pulled her down on his lap. They still haven't investigated the sexual phone calls or Danny trying to break into her hotel room, so we told it again to these investigators. Alicia is also starting her 5th EEO investigation this week. That makes 11 investigations the Agency has put her through since May 2011, and no one has been fired for these incidents EXCEPT ALICIA. (No Mr. Secretary, Tyler Castle was not fired for his assault upon Alicia - look it up.) The men who attempted to rape her, break into her room, publicly called her a whore, made her urinate in front of the other men, made her tell them when her period started, etc. etc. etc. are all working - but ALICIA HAS BEEN TERMINATED even though she was at the top of her class at the Academy, always had successful performance evaluations, and never had a misconduct issue. Numerous male employees cannot claim that (Ron Booker for example) and they are still working. Enough said.
It is really not enough said or done. Where are all the women's groups and Native American tribes that should be coming to her rescue. And, more importantly, where is the President Obama's and his political appointee's support for women that is being touted daily during this election? What is the "Council on Women & Girls" created by President Obama doing to stop some of these clearly abusive actions within government agencies? We asked before and will ask again - how would you like your mother, sister, daughter or granddaughter treated to this type of disgusting behavior in our Federal government and work place?
Listen to what Alicia Dabney has to put up with at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjZwLEFLAhI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
National Whistleblower Center celebrates 234th Anniversity of 1st Whistleblower Law
Dear OccupyEPA,
Today marks the 234th anniversary of our country’s first whistleblower law. ..... On July 30, 1778, our Founding Fathers passed America’s first whistleblower law, which stated that it is the “duty” of “all inhabitants” to blow the whistle. We all know that corporate and government officials often harass, demote or fire employees who have the courage to report misconduct. ....The National Whistleblowers Center has worked hard since 1988 to protect these courageous employees. We have accomplished some great things along the way, but we have more to do. There are many employees who do not have any whistleblower protections or if they have protections they do not know how to exercise their rights while protecting themselves. How can you help? By joining our Partners for Truth program. As a Partner, your monthly donation to the National Whistleblowers Center will help protect whistleblowers. We will use your monthly donation to defend whistleblowers, support precedent-setting legal cases, expand whistleblower protections, educate employees about their rights, and build public support.
Join the Movement! Join Partners for Truth! The National Whistleblowers Center does not accept any corporate or government money. We depend on grassroots supporters, like you! Please help us protect those who protect all of us by joining Partners for Truth today!
Sincerely,
Lindsey Williams
Director of Advocacy and Development
Today marks the 234th anniversary of our country’s first whistleblower law. ..... On July 30, 1778, our Founding Fathers passed America’s first whistleblower law, which stated that it is the “duty” of “all inhabitants” to blow the whistle. We all know that corporate and government officials often harass, demote or fire employees who have the courage to report misconduct. ....The National Whistleblowers Center has worked hard since 1988 to protect these courageous employees. We have accomplished some great things along the way, but we have more to do. There are many employees who do not have any whistleblower protections or if they have protections they do not know how to exercise their rights while protecting themselves. How can you help? By joining our Partners for Truth program. As a Partner, your monthly donation to the National Whistleblowers Center will help protect whistleblowers. We will use your monthly donation to defend whistleblowers, support precedent-setting legal cases, expand whistleblower protections, educate employees about their rights, and build public support.
Join the Movement! Join Partners for Truth! The National Whistleblowers Center does not accept any corporate or government money. We depend on grassroots supporters, like you! Please help us protect those who protect all of us by joining Partners for Truth today!
Sincerely,
Lindsey Williams
Director of Advocacy and Development
Go To: Whistleblowersblog.org
Summary: Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (in Richmond, Virginia) ruled that employers cannot use the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) to make claims against former employees who copied computer files before separating from employment....
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/corporate-1/fourth-circuit-says-employees-can-copy-data-the-employer-allows-them-to-see/index.html
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/corporate-1/fourth-circuit-says-employees-can-copy-data-the-employer-allows-them-to-see/index.html
Someone Needs to be FIRED! July 23, 2012
EPA's Office of Civil Rights works hand-in-hand with the EPA Office of General Counsel on complaints of discrimination. Unresolved complaints from the regional offices, such as Mr. De Los Santos' complaint below, are handled by the headquarter's OCR staff. That office was previously under the management of Karen Higginbotham, who was removed after 9 years for violations of civil rights laws and regulations (see Deloitte report and response by Susan Morris, former OCR Assistant Director). Ray Spears, Higginbotham's mentor and former Deputy Chief of Staff, retired, then under protest, Administrator Jackson replaced Higginbotham with another of Spears' mentees, Rafael DeLeon. It was well-known throughout the agency that DeLeon, an attorney, had been responsible for creating the legal office that defended the agency against complainants, had complaints filed against him by women, and had been removed as the EPA Director of Human Resources. Protesters chanting "Rafael Must Go," were met with silence by Jackson.
"Ms. Jackson should be ashamed of herself," said a former EPA employee. "Everyone knows Rafael's history, particularly women and he should not be in that office. They don't know what they are doing and maybe that's what they want - a highly ineffective civil rights office. The EPA OCR has been under fire for the past decade, but it doesn't seem to faze the EPA Administrator or her 'management mafia'."
Unresolved pre-complaints filed by employees are sent to the headquarter's OCR to process once an employee files a formal complaint. There, contrary to national policy, the complaints are pushed through a slow and arduous process filled with attorneys. Not only did Administrator Jackson put DeLeon in the OCR, but he then selected an inexperienced civil rights lawyer as his Deputy and brought in other attorneys to assist him following the highly critcal Deloitte Consulting report. Complaints go from there and are reviewed by DeLeon's peers, attorneys in the Office of General Counsel.
A review of the EPA second quarter (March 31, 2012) No Fear Act data report shows that DeLeon needs more than just assistance from his peers. As a small agency (approx. 17,500 employees), with professional positions and 1,000 attorneys, EPA has on average 70 formal complaints per year (the report does not include precomplaints or informal complaints). Under DeLeon's management, the processing time for those complaints has gone from an average number of up to 244 days in the "Investigative Stage" to over 440 days by only the second quarter or almost double. The average number of days in the "Final Action Stage" increased from an average number of up to 286 days to over 531, with over 966 average number of days in the "Final Action Stage" listed in the report. Unbelievably, the average number of days "Pending Prior to Dismissal" increased from up to 339 days to 1,059 in 2011 and 1,109 in 2012. There were two "Findings of Discrimination" against the agency in 2008 and one during 2012 prior to March 31st. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebaoy, author of "No Fear, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at EPA," received a major jury finding of discrimination against EPA in 2001, which also resulted in the passage by Congress of the first civil rights legislation of the 21 Century - the 2002 No Fear Act.
"The EPA No Fear Act Report is incorrect and their processing times are abysmal," said Susan Morris, a subject matter expert in civil rights and former EPA Assistant Director in OCR, who received a finding of retaliation for whistleblowing against EPA from the Office of Special Counsel in September 2012. "In their latest report published online (see EPA No Fear Act Report data at http://www.epa.gov/ocr/nofearactrpt.htm), the agency lists zero complaints for over 5 years based on Reprisal (or retaliation for engaging in protected activity), when I am aware of at least three complaints filed on reprisal and I'm sure there are more. Can you imagine listing the "Total Complaints from the previous 5 Fiscal Years" as zero, then listing below that the number of complainants as 114 and number of complaints pending as 27 in investigation, 33 at a hearing, 38 waiting a final action, and zero Appeals with EEOC OFO? This is ludicrous because you can't have a complainant without a complaint and they can't be at various stages unless they are pending. Also, Mr. De Los Santos, who got a finding of discrimination against EPA at the administrative stage, filed an appeal with EEOC OFO," continued Morris after reviewing their report.
"Administrator Jackson decided to ignore the OSC finding pf retaliation against me for whistleblowing, but maybe she should reverse her position and let me assist her in straightening out the OCR mess once and for all. I know that there are three major complaints of discrimination in District Court against EPA and two more coming that I know of so far. It would be in EPA and this Administrator's interest to stop using taxpayer money to defend the indefensible," Morris said. "EPA takes people to court instead of resolving their own problems at the lowest level in the process, which is national policy. Their Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program never worked either because they put it into the legal office and a lawyer is still handling cases. EPA keeps getting major findings because they keep doing the same things using the same people. It has cost all of us milliions of dollars in lost productivity and funds that would be better spent on protecting our environment. I think it's time for President Obama to step in on behalf of the hardworking women and minorities, scientists and other professionals at EPA who just want to come to work and do a good job for the American public."
"Ms. Jackson should be ashamed of herself," said a former EPA employee. "Everyone knows Rafael's history, particularly women and he should not be in that office. They don't know what they are doing and maybe that's what they want - a highly ineffective civil rights office. The EPA OCR has been under fire for the past decade, but it doesn't seem to faze the EPA Administrator or her 'management mafia'."
Unresolved pre-complaints filed by employees are sent to the headquarter's OCR to process once an employee files a formal complaint. There, contrary to national policy, the complaints are pushed through a slow and arduous process filled with attorneys. Not only did Administrator Jackson put DeLeon in the OCR, but he then selected an inexperienced civil rights lawyer as his Deputy and brought in other attorneys to assist him following the highly critcal Deloitte Consulting report. Complaints go from there and are reviewed by DeLeon's peers, attorneys in the Office of General Counsel.
A review of the EPA second quarter (March 31, 2012) No Fear Act data report shows that DeLeon needs more than just assistance from his peers. As a small agency (approx. 17,500 employees), with professional positions and 1,000 attorneys, EPA has on average 70 formal complaints per year (the report does not include precomplaints or informal complaints). Under DeLeon's management, the processing time for those complaints has gone from an average number of up to 244 days in the "Investigative Stage" to over 440 days by only the second quarter or almost double. The average number of days in the "Final Action Stage" increased from an average number of up to 286 days to over 531, with over 966 average number of days in the "Final Action Stage" listed in the report. Unbelievably, the average number of days "Pending Prior to Dismissal" increased from up to 339 days to 1,059 in 2011 and 1,109 in 2012. There were two "Findings of Discrimination" against the agency in 2008 and one during 2012 prior to March 31st. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebaoy, author of "No Fear, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at EPA," received a major jury finding of discrimination against EPA in 2001, which also resulted in the passage by Congress of the first civil rights legislation of the 21 Century - the 2002 No Fear Act.
"The EPA No Fear Act Report is incorrect and their processing times are abysmal," said Susan Morris, a subject matter expert in civil rights and former EPA Assistant Director in OCR, who received a finding of retaliation for whistleblowing against EPA from the Office of Special Counsel in September 2012. "In their latest report published online (see EPA No Fear Act Report data at http://www.epa.gov/ocr/nofearactrpt.htm), the agency lists zero complaints for over 5 years based on Reprisal (or retaliation for engaging in protected activity), when I am aware of at least three complaints filed on reprisal and I'm sure there are more. Can you imagine listing the "Total Complaints from the previous 5 Fiscal Years" as zero, then listing below that the number of complainants as 114 and number of complaints pending as 27 in investigation, 33 at a hearing, 38 waiting a final action, and zero Appeals with EEOC OFO? This is ludicrous because you can't have a complainant without a complaint and they can't be at various stages unless they are pending. Also, Mr. De Los Santos, who got a finding of discrimination against EPA at the administrative stage, filed an appeal with EEOC OFO," continued Morris after reviewing their report.
"Administrator Jackson decided to ignore the OSC finding pf retaliation against me for whistleblowing, but maybe she should reverse her position and let me assist her in straightening out the OCR mess once and for all. I know that there are three major complaints of discrimination in District Court against EPA and two more coming that I know of so far. It would be in EPA and this Administrator's interest to stop using taxpayer money to defend the indefensible," Morris said. "EPA takes people to court instead of resolving their own problems at the lowest level in the process, which is national policy. Their Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program never worked either because they put it into the legal office and a lawyer is still handling cases. EPA keeps getting major findings because they keep doing the same things using the same people. It has cost all of us milliions of dollars in lost productivity and funds that would be better spent on protecting our environment. I think it's time for President Obama to step in on behalf of the hardworking women and minorities, scientists and other professionals at EPA who just want to come to work and do a good job for the American public."
EPA Management Mafia............. by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)
http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1100
“In many federal agencies there is a management mafia that will defend one of their own no matter how outrageous the conduct,” stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein. “In our experience, EPA employees who file complaints are subjected to a new ordeal, presided over by an Office of General Counsel that gives no quarter and is willing to use every tactic to delay, discourage and demonize.”
[De Los Santos] had complained of a pattern of discriminatory comments, including –
*His supervisor accusing him of stealing license plates and reselling them for profit in Mexico;
*Women co-workers were routinely referred to as "pussies";
*Native American co-workers were called names like "Squatting Eagle" and "Two Dogs F__king" while
*An African-American colleague was ridiculed as mentally slow.
De Los Santos’ supervisor dismissed this conduct as “just Special Agent grab-assing” and admonished that “you need to act like a man” and stop complaining. Significantly, the EEO Commission found that: “Here, many of the offensive comments…occurred in front of supervisors immediately after a meeting about EEO issues,
demonstrating that agency officials did not take EEO issues seriously.” . . . .
Throughout, EPA has defended the supervisory agent and even gave him a “Manager of the Year” award. Now, EPA must decide whether to implement the EEOC
order or appeal it to federal court.
NOTE from OccupyEPA: The agency gave Karen Higginbotham, former Director of the Office of Civil Rights, the "Administrator's Manager of the Year Award," ignoring protests and letters written by the OCR staff against her receiving the award. It appears to be EPA policy to reward these officials.
_______________________________________________________________
Some employees have questioned whether EPA's annual NOFEAR training is a hollow exercise.
NOTE from OccupyEPA: The OCR under Ms. Higginbotham paid EEOC $500,000 to provide basic EEO training to EPA employees for 2-3 years and then did not submit the mandatory Management Directive 715 Report to EEOC for three years.
Despite De Los Santos' failing to prevail on some parts of his EEO claim, due to procedural and evidentiary issues, his July 12 victory is significant. It should be noted,
however, that the EEO process is usually long, difficult, and expensive; and more often than not it does not bring justice for employees.
Our best defense against abusive managers who discriminate, harass, and retaliate is banding together, sticking together, and speaking out through our union./steve
_________________
George De Los Santos, Complainant, v. Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator,Environmental Protection Agency, Agency Equal Employment Opportunity Commission-OFO Appeal No. 0120091233 Agency No. 20040065R6 July 12, 2012
DECISION
On November 5, 2008, Complainant filed an appeal from the Agency's October 3, 2008, final decision concerning his equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The Commission deems the appeal timely and accepts it pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a). For the following reasons, the Commission MODIFIES the Agency's final decision.
BACKGROUND
In De Los Santos v. Environmental Protection Agency, EEOC Appeal No. 0120061139 (January 11, 2008), Req. for recons. denied, EEOC Request No. 0520080325
(August 4, 2008), we found that Complainant established that he was subjected to a hostile work environment on the basis of his national origin (Hispanic) between December 2001 and August 2004. Specifically, Complainant established that there were numerous discriminatory comments made about Complainant's national
origin, as well as racially offensive comments towards other protected groups.
Complainant established that only non-White employees failed the shotgun exercises and have had their weapons confiscated. Additionally, on three separate occasions Complainant's supervisor sent Complainant, who is a Criminal Investigator, to the Dallas Office specifically to perform custodial tasks such as cleaning a conference room, cleaning an equipment room, and cleaning a file room, even though there were seven White agents at the Dallas Office that could have performed the tasks. The supervisor also assigned Complainant remedial administrative tasks, such as acting as a chauffeur and photocopying. The supervisor followed this by writing a letter commending Complainant on his chauffer and photocopying abilities. Additionally, Complainant was yelled at, put down, bad mouthed to other EPA Offices, denied relocation, and denied work related travel.
We found that Complainant established that discrimination towards minorities permeated the workforce in the form of discriminatory and demeaning comments and adverse treatment, and that the Agency was liable for the harassment. We reversed the Agency's final decision, and ordered the Agency to, amongst other things, conduct a supplementary investigation into Complainant's entitlement to compensatory damages.
In correspondence to the Agency dated August 26, 2008, Complainant requested pecuniary and non-pecuniary compensatory damages in the amount of $613,176.61. At the conclusion of the supplementary investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a final decision on October 3, 2008. The Agency found that Complainant established that he incurred $35,262.00 in compensatory damages as a result of the discrimination. Complainant now appeals that decision to the Commission.
CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL
Complainant contends on appeal that the Agency erred in determining the compensatory damages Complainant is entitled to as a result of the harassment he was subjected to on the basis of his national origin. Complainant contends that the evidence of the record supports his claims for compensatory damages, and he provided additional documentation on appeal to further support his claims. In opposition to the appeal, the Agency contends that its final decision was correct in determining the amount of compensatory damages Complainant is entitled to, and that Complainant should not receive any more than $35,262.00 in compensatory damages as a result of the discrimination.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
As this is an appeal from a decision issued without a hearing, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b), the Agency's decision is subject to de novo review by the Commission. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a). See Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, at Chapter 9, § W.A. (November 9, 1999) (explaining that the de novo standard of review "requires that the Commission examine the record without regard to the factual and legal determinations of the previous decision maker," and that EEOC "review the documents, statements, and testimony of record, including any timely and relevant submissions of the parties, and . . issue its decision based on the Commission's own assessment of the record and its interpretation of the law").
Pecuniary Compensatory Damages
Compensatory damages may be awarded for pecuniary losses that are directly or proximately caused by the Agency's discriminatory conduct. See Compensatory and Punitive Damages. We note that on appeal Complainant withdrew his pecuniary damages claim for $65,000 for relocation expenses. Available Under Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, EEOC Notice No. 915.002 at 8 (Notice). Pecuniary losses are out-of-pocket expenses incurred as a result of the Agency's unlawful action,
including job-hunting expenses, moving expenses, medical expenses, psychiatric expenses, physical therapy expenses, and other quantifiable out-of-pocket expenses. Id. Past pecuniary losses are losses incurred prior to the resolution of a complaint through a finding of discrimination, or a voluntary settlement. Id. at 8-9. Future pecuniary losses are losses that are likely to occur after resolution of a complaint. Id. at 9. In a claim for pecuniary compensatory damages, Complainant must demonstrate, through appropriate evidence and documentation, the harm suffered as a result of the Agency's discriminatory action. Rivera v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01934156 (July 22, 1994); Notice at 11-12, 14; Carpenter v. Department of Agriculture, EEOC Appeal No. 01945652 (July 17, 1995). Objective evidence in support of a claim for pecuniary damages includes documentation showing actual out-of-pocket expenses with an explanation of the expenditure. See Notice at 11-12; Carle v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01922369 (January 5, 1993). Awards are limited to compensation for the actual harm suffered as a result of the agency's
discriminatory actions. See Carter v. Duncan-Higgans, Ltd., 727 F.2d 1225 (D.C.Cir. 1994); Notice at 13. The Agency is only responsible for those damages that
are clearly shown to be caused by the Agency's discriminatory conduct. Carle v. Department of the Navy, supra. To recover damages, the Complainant must prove
that the employer's discriminatory actions were the cause of the pecuniary loss. Notice at 8.
1. Past Pecuniary Damages: Housing Expenses
In our previous decision we found that as part of the overall harassment that Complainant was subjected to, he was denied relocations. Complainant requested housing expenses for these denied relocations from February 2002 until September 2008 in the amount of $92,965.70. As an initial matter, we note that Complainant requested four transfers during his employment with the Agency, the first request just a few days after he began his employment with the Agency in the El Paso office. While our previous decision does not specify which transfer requests were discriminatory, we find that the Agency's interpretation of the decision was reasonable when it found that the denial of Complainant's second request to transfer, which was on August 29, 2002, was the first transfer denial that was discriminatory. Additionally, we note that in October 2007 Complainant voluntarily retired from federal service. Therefore, Complainant is only entitled to housing expenses from August 2002 through October 2007.
Complainant provided a lease for an apartment in El Paso which reflected that Complainant paid $589 in rent per month for ten months from October 1, 2002, through July 2003, which totals $5,890. The Agency agreed to reimburse Complainant for the $5,890. Complainant moved to another apartment in El Paso in August 2003 and requested expenses in the amount of $445 per month until May 2004, which totals $4,005. However, Complainant failed to provide any documentation to the Agency that would establish that he actually paid these expenses from August 2003 through August 2004, and as a result the Agency did not reimburse Complainant for these expenses. Additionally, Complainant asserted that he incurred housing expenses in Houston when he purchased a home as a result of the discriminatory denials of transfer to Dallas. Complainant requested reimbursement for monthly mortgage payments of $1,593.37 from September 2004 until September 2008, totaling $62,164.83. Complainant failed to provide any documentation that would establish what he actually paid for his monthly mortgage payments, or a breakdown of those payments. Despite this, the Agency agreed to pay Complainant the reasonable rental rate for the Houston area established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the period of September 2004 until his retirement in October 2007. The Agency noted that it should only be liable for the reasonable rental rate because the Agency's discrimination did not cause Complainant to purchase a house. The Agency concluded that Complainant was entitled to $23,442 for this period.
Complainant requested compensation for the rental of furniture in El Paso and Houston as a result of the Agency's discriminatory failure to relocate him. The record establishes that the first payment for rental furniture was in June 2002, which was before the discriminatory failure to transfer in August 2002. Complainant did provide a six month lease for furniture beginning on October 2, 2002, totaling $930. However, Complainant did not provide any clear documentation 2 to support his additional claims for reimbursement for furniture. As a result, the Agency agreed to reimburse him $930 for rental furniture. Complainant also requested $16,797.97 for utilities. However, Complainant again failed to provide the Agency with any documentation to establish that he actually incurred these expenses. Additionally, the Agency noted that even though Complainant did not provide any documentation for his utility expenses, Complainant was being compensated for utilities because HUD's reasonable rental rate for the Houston area for September 2004 - October 2007 included utilities. As a result, the Agency denied Complainant's request. Finally, Complainant also requested substantial amounts of money for living expenses, repairs to his home, real estate taxes, insurance, and association fees. However, Complainant failed to provide the Agency with any documentation to establish that he actually incurred these expenses. The only documentation the Complainant provided to the Agency was a general reference to his credit card statements from 2002 until 2008, which included hundreds of charges such as a Royal Caribbean Cruise, medical services, automotive work, electronic purchases, and ordinary living expenses that would have been incurred regardless of the Agency's actions. Khatami v. Dep't of Health and Human Services, EEOC Appeal No. 07A30127 (Sep. 30, 2004) (Complainant is not entitled to pecuniary damages for living expenses because such expenses would have been incurred whether or not the Agency discriminated agains Complainant). As a result, the Agency did not reimburse Complainant for these expenses.
2 While Complainant asserted that his purchase of furniture in Houston can be established by his credit card bill, we note that it is not possible to distinguish the expenses on the credit card bill.
On appeal, Complainant for the first time provided documentation for his additional housing expenses after July 2003. New evidence will generally not be accepted on appeal. Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), § VI(A)(3). We may accept new evidence, however, if the parties affirmatively demonstrate it was not previously available despite the exercise of due diligence. Id.; Est. of Petersen v. Sec'y of Transp., EEOC Appeal No. 07A50016 (September 21, 2005). In the instant case, there is nothing in the record that would indicate that the documentation establishing Complainant's
housing expenses was not available prior to the appeal. Further, Complainant's attorney stated in the brief in support of the appeal that she failed to provide the additional documentary evidence to support all of Complainant's expenses because it was voluminous. The record establishes that the Agency clearly asked Complainant if he wanted an additional 30 day extension, to which Complainant responded that he did not want an extension and the evidence he provided established his pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses. Finally, while Complainant asserted that it is the Agency's fault for not specifically requesting the additional information, we note that Complainant has the burden of establishing his out-of-pocket expenses by providing documentation showing that the actual out-of-pocket expenses occurred. Notice at 10. Therefore, we find that Complainant is prohibited from providing additional evidence on appeal that was readily available during the investigation. As a result, we affirm the Agency's finding that Complainant is entitled to $30,262.00 in past pecuniary damages for housing expenses.
2. Past Pecuniary Damages: Work Related Expenses
Complainant asserted that he is entitled to compensation for work related expenses he sustained while he worked in El Paso and Houston, including office supplies, a desk, an office chair, a computer, and a printer. Complainant claimed that he incurred these expenses because the Agency did not have physical office space and did not provide work equipment.
After a review of the record, we find that Complainant did not establish that these expenses were causally related to the Agency's discrimination. Further, Agency officials stated that Complainant was provided a place to work in an Agency office, as well as a computer and a printer. Additionally, even if Complainant had established that these expenses were causally connected to the discrimination, Complainant did not provide clear documentation for these expenses. Instead, Complainant provided general
credit card bills which did not establish that the expenses were business related expenses. As a result, we agree with the Agency that these expenses are
not compensable.
3. Past Pecuniary Damages: Temporary Duty Allowance
Complainant alleged that he was entitled to $30,265 for the denial of temporary duty allowance (TDY) for when he travelled to Dallas on official government business. The Agency stated that Complainant failed to establish that this claim was causally connected to the discrimination. However in our previous decision we found that Complainant established that he was discriminated against when he was sent to the Dallas Office on three separate occasions to perform custodial tasks. Therefore,
Complainant may be eligible for compensation connected to these trips to Dallas. While Complainant states that he should be granted TDY, Complainant did not establish that he qualified for compensation under TDY regulations. For example, TDY provides for lodging expenses. Complainant stated during the supplementary investigation that he stayed at his family's home in Dallas and did not incur lodging expenses. On appeal, Complainant provided additional documentation for a hotel stay on his way to
Dallas. However, as we stated above, Complainant is prohibited from providing additional evidence on appeal that was readily available during the investigation.
Additionally, we note that on appeal Complainant requested $10,846 for TDY per diem. However, Complainant did not provide any explanation for how he arrived at this amount, including the daily per diem rate or how many days of per diem he was requesting. Therefore, we find that Complainant is not entitled to TDY compensation.
4. Past Pecuniary Damages: Cash Award for Use of Foreign Language
Complainant stated that he was denied payment of a cash award for up to 5% of his basic pay as a law enforcement officer who possessed and made substantial use of Spanish in the performance of his official duties. Complainant requested $37,179 in compensation for this award.
A review of the record reveals that Complainant never alleged in his underlying complaint that he was discriminated against when he was denied cash awards. We have previously held that it is not appropriate for a Complainant to raise new claims for the first time on appeal, including in claims for compensatory damages. See Lemons v. Bureau of Prisons, EEOC Appeal No. 0120102516 (Nov. 16, 2011); Hubbard v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. 01A40449 (April 22, 2004). Therefore, we find that Complainant is not entitled to compensation for these cash awards.
5. Past Pecuniary Damages: Pay Differential in Houston
Complainant asserted that when he was transferred to Houston from El Paso on June 1, 2004, his first month salary reflected his El Paso salary, which was $956.80 less than his salary in Houston. A review of the record reveals that Complainant never alleged in his underlying complaint that he was discriminated against when he was paid less his first month in Houston. As we stated above, it is not appropriate for a Complainant to raise new claims for the first time on appeal. Therefore, we find that Complainant is not entitled to compensation for the pay differential for the first month he was in Houston.
6. Future Pecuniary Damages: EPA Gold Medal Award
Complainant asserted that he is entitled to future pecuniary damages for an EPA Gold Medal Award that has consistently paid $10,000. Complainant asserted that sometime on October 13, 2006, he was removed from a case involving an explosion at an oil refinery, and he believes that employees who worked on the case will eventually be recommended for the EPA Gold Medal Award and accompanying cash award. Future pecuniary losses are losses that are likely to occur after resolution of a complaint. Notice at 9. Here, Complainant was removed from the oil refinery case after the time period relevant to this case and by different management officials than those in the underlying complaint. There is no evidence that establishes that Complainant's removal from the case was linked to the harassment that was addressed in our previous decision. Further, the Commission has held that cash awards are based on the quality of an individual employee's performance, and it would be too
speculative to allow a Complainant to receive future pecuniary damages in the form of compensation for a high level of performance. See Morgan v. Dep't of Navy, EEOC Petition No. 04980027 (Dec. 16, 1999); Schellenberg v. Dep't of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 01944126 (Dec. 13, 1994). Here, it is speculative whether Complainant or any employee would have received the EPA Gold Medal Award and a corresponding cash award for his work on the case. Therefore we fmd that
Complainant is not entitled to compensation for the EPA Gold Medal Award.
6. Future Pecuniary Damages: Loss of Value in Real Estate
On appeal, Complainant asserted that he is entitled to out-of-pocket future pecuniary losses in the amount of $46,480.73 3 for future real estate losses. Complainant asserted that he purchased a home in La Marque, Texas, in 2004 when he was denied a transfer to Dallas, and he requested costs associated with selling the house.
To establish the current value of his home, Complainant compared his house to a similar house three blocks away that is identical in the number of rooms, square footage, and location, and had been for sale on the market for 1 Vz years and dropped substantially in price. The Commission has previously held that real estate losses are speculative in nature and are not compensable. See Padilla v. Dep't of Housing and Urban Development, EEOC Appeal No. 01A23791 (Sep. 30, 2003) (Real estate losses based on cost of square footage, interest, and appreciation of the real estate market are speculative and not compensable). Accordingly, Complainant is not entitled
to future pecuniary damages for the potential loss of value in his La Marque home. Complainant is also not entitled to potential closing costs, real estate commissions, and other similar expenses' because these costs are also speculative and Complainant provided no documentation to support these expenses.
3 We note that Complainant originally requested $82,353.31 for future pecuniary losses associated with his house in La Marque, but he reduced this amount on appeal.
Non-Pecuniary Compensatory Damages
Complainant requested $150,000 for non-pecuniary damages. The Agency awarded Complainant $5,000 for non-pecuniary damages. In a claim for compensatory damages, a Complainant must demonstrate, through appropriate evidence and documentation, the harm suffered as a result of the Agency's discriminatory action; the
extent, nature, and severity of the harm suffered; and the duration or expected duration of the harm. Rivera v. Dep't of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01934156
(July 22, 1994); Notice at 11-12, 14; Carpenter v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Appeal No. 01945652 (July 17, 1995). Objective evidence in support of a claim for non-pecuniary damages claims includes statements from the Complainant and others, including family members, co-workers, and medical professionals. See Compensatory and Punitive Damages Available Under Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, EEOC Notice No. N915.002 (July 14, 1992) (hereafter referred to as "Notice"); Carle v. Dep't of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01922369 (January 5, 1993). Non-pecuniary damages must be limited to compensation for the actual harm suffered as a result of the Agency's discriminatory actions. See Carter v. Duncan-Higgans, Ltd., 727 F.2d 1225 (D.C. Cir. 1994); Notice at 13. A proper award should take into account the severity of the harm and the length of time that the injured party suffered the harm. See Carpenter, supra. Additionally, the amount of the award should not be "monstrously excessive" standing alone, should not be the product of passion or prejudice, and should be consistent with the amount awarded in similar cases. See Jackson v. United
States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01972555 (April 15, 1999), citing Cygnar v. City of Chicago, 865 F. 2d 827, 848 (7th Cir. 1989). Finally, we note that in determining non-pecuniary compensatory damages, the Commission has also taken into consideration the nature of the Agency's discriminatory actions. See Utt v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0720070001 (March 26, 2009); Brown-Fleming v. Dep't of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 0120082667 (October 28, 2010).
Complainant submitted a personal statement in which he stated that the discrimination he suffered will haunt him for the rest of his life. Complainant stated that for more than five years the harassment caused him severe emotional suffering such as mental anguish, anger, fright, resentment, frustration, loss of self esteem, irritability, humiliation, embarrassment, anger, betrayal, anxiety, stress, decreased energy, decreased motivation, and depression. Complainant also stated that he suffered from loss
of enjoyment of life due to the harassment and the separation from his family, and that the discrimination and lies spread by the responsible management official damaged his character and his reputation. Complainant also stated that for more than five years the harassment caused him physical ailments, such as headaches, upset
stomach, difficulty sleeping, stiffness in cervical and dorsal spine, chest pain, numbness in his limbs, shortness of breath, and diarrhea. Complainant also stated that he lost four teeth from gritting his teeth so hard in anger because of the harassment. Complainant also alleged that he developed diabetes as a result of the discrimination. Complainant submitted a document from a medical examination dated December 23, 2002, which indicated that Complainant has diabetes. Complainant also submitted an April 11, 2007 letter from his physician which stated that he has been treating Complainant for diabetes for approximately three years. The doctor noted that stress can
greatly affect glucose levels, and that Complainant reported to him that working away from his family was a constant stressful situation which affected his glucose levels. Notably, both documents were silent about the actual cause of Complainant's diabetes. Complainant's wife and brother submitted affidavits that supported Complainant's assertions. Complainant's wife stated that during their daily conversations about the discrimination, she knew that he was enduring severe mental anguish and severe emotional pain and suffering.
Complainant's wife reiterated the emotional and physical ailments Complainant experienced as listed above, and that the discrimination caused her mental anguish and emotional pain as well. She also stated that the failure to relocate him caused a strain between Complainant and the rest of the family. Complainant's brother stated that he had numerous conversations with Complainant about the effects of the discrimination, and he reiterated the emotional and physical ailments listed above. Additionally, a coworker who worked with Complainant and observed the discriminatory harassment submitted an affidavit and stated that the discrimination made Complainant angry, upset, stressed, embarrassed, humiliated, and he often talked about how much he missed his family due to the Agency's failure to relocate him. After careful consideration of the evidence of record, we find an award of $50,000 for non-pecuniary compensatory damages is appropriate. This amount takes into consideration the nature of the discriminatory acts, the severity of the physical and emotional harm suffered, the length of time Complainant suffered the harm, and is consistent with prior Commission precedent. See McCoy v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 01A43628 (Sept. 22, 2005) (Complainant was awarded $50,000 in non-pecuniary damages where discrimination resulted in Complainant experiencing fatigue, exhaustion, stress, hopelessness, fear, and she experienced frequent headaches, lack of sleep, and crying. Complainant's family and friends corroborated her claim); Arizola v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. 07A30132 (Feb. 4, 2004) (Complainant was awarded $50,000 in non-pecuniary damages after discrimination caused Complainant to suffer for approximately three years from depression, anxiety, headaches, fatigue, fearfulness, tearfulness, and an inability to concentrate); Schinner v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal no. 01A03837 (March 7, 2002) (Complainant was awarded $50,000 in non-pecuniary damages where harassment resulted in Complainant feeling humiliated, embarrassed, isolated, ostracized, she suffered sleeplessness and it caused a strain on her relationship with her husband and children); Powell v. USPS, EEOC Appeal no. 01A50989 (March 3, 2006) (Complainant was awarded $45,000 in non-pecuniary damages where a hostile work environment resulted in Complainant suffering emotional distress, which was corroborated by his wife). Accordingly, we conclude that an award of $50,000 will adequately compensate Complainant for the physical and emotional harm he suffered as a result of the harassment.
CONCLUSION
Based on a thorough review of the record and the contentions on appeal, including those not specifically addressed herein, we MODIFY the Agency's final decision, and we find that Complainant is entitled to $30,262 in pecuniary compensatory damages, and $50,000 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages. We ORDER the Agency to comply with our order below.
ORDER
The Agency, to the extent it has not already done so, is ordered to take the following remedial actions:
1. Within thirty (60) sixty calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, pay Complainant $50,000 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages. Within sixty (60) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, pay Complainant $30,262 in pecuniary compensatory damages.
The Agency is further directed to submit areport of compliance, as provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision." The report shall include supporting documentation of the Agency's payment of compensatory damages.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)
Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory. The Agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. The Agency's report must contain supporting documentation, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant. If the Agency does not comply with the Commission's order, the Complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(a). The Complainant also has the right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(g). Alternatively, the Complainant has the right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File a Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. §§ 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the
underlying complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409.
ATTORNEY'S FEES (H0610)
If Complainant has been represented by an attorney (as defined by 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(e)(1)(iii)), he/she is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees incurred in the processing of the complaint. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(e). The award of attorney's fees shall be paid by the Agency. The attorney shall submit a verified statement of fees to the Agency -- not to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Office of Federal Operations -- within thirty (30) calendar days of this decision becoming final.
The Agency shall then process the claim for attorney's fees in accordance with 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0610)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this case if the Complainant or the Agency submits a written request containing arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
1. The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed with the Office of Federal Operations (0F0) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. In the absence of a legible postmark, the request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. §
1614.604. The request or opposition must also include proof of service on the other party. Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(c).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (T0610)
This decision affirms the Agency's final decision/action in part, but it also requires the Agency to continue its administrative processing of a portion of your complaint. You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision on both that portion of your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that portion of the complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative processing. In the alternative, you may file a civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date you filed your complaint with the Agency, or your appeal with the Commission, until such time as the Agency issues its final decision on your complaint. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official Agency head or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. If you file a request
to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791, 794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within the sole
discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File a Civil Action").
NOTE: The EPA is required to report what penalties were taken against those who discriminated against Mr. De Los Santos. Stay tuned.......
Senator Akaka Letter on the Merit Systems Protection Board - C4C July 20, 2012
See C4C's most recent youtube video highlighting nine integrity issues of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Video 3 minutes in length.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fedfsTz28Vc
The video compliments an earlier letter C4C forwarded to Senator Akaka
http://www.scribd.com/doc/95785696/C4C-Letter-to-Sen-Akaka-Re-The-Merit-System-Protection-Board
Please share with video and letter with others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fedfsTz28Vc
The video compliments an earlier letter C4C forwarded to Senator Akaka
http://www.scribd.com/doc/95785696/C4C-Letter-to-Sen-Akaka-Re-The-Merit-System-Protection-Board
Please share with video and letter with others.
Senator Grassley supports Federal whistleblowers again! July 18, 2012
Summary: Once again Senator Grassley has proven himself to be a champion of whistleblowers and government oversight. The NWC applauds Senator Grassley's
floor statement today and we hope that the FDA heard him.
View the entire entry at:
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/whistleblowers-government-empl/fda-whistleblowers/senator-grassley-hammers-the-fda-on-the-senate-floor/index.html
floor statement today and we hope that the FDA heard him.
View the entire entry at:
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/whistleblowers-government-empl/fda-whistleblowers/senator-grassley-hammers-the-fda-on-the-senate-floor/index.html
FDA's Illegal Whistleblower Surveillance June 16, 2012
Summary: NWC Executive Director Stephen Kohn spoke to CBS Evening News
tonight about the chilling effect the FDA's illegal whistleblower surveillance
program has on employees' willingness to report serious health and safety
issues. You can TAKE ACTION to stop the government's...
View the entire entry:
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/whistleblowers-government-empl/fda-whistleblowers/cbs-evening-news-fda-spying-on-their-own-scientists/index.html
View the entire entry:
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/whistleblowers-government-empl/fda-whistleblowers/cbs-evening-news-fda-spying-on-their-own-scientists/index.html
WE HEARD IT THROUGH THE GRAPEVINE........ June 12, 2012
They just don't know what they're doing. It's as simple as that or is it? We heard that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Civil Rights is still in a shambles and their Director Rafael DeLeon is looking for solutions from outside sources to help him fix the numerous problems that have not abated since their previous fiasco.
Let's see if we have this right? The former Director, Karen Higginbotham, sat in the office for over 10 years having been moved there from the EPA contracting office. She was appointed as the Director of Civil Rights and given a Senior Executive Service position with the assistance and blessing of her mentor, Ray Spears, in the beginning of 2000, where she sat until she was removed following public exposure for failing to process environmental community complaints (some for over a decade), failing to submit mandatory Congressional and EEOC reports for years, failing to timely process internal employee complaints, and generally creating havoc and dissention within the office. Read the Deloitte Consulting report and review found above that cost taxpayers $350,000 and the rebuttal by Susan Morris, an expert in civil rights and former Assistant Director in that office.
To fix this public embarrassment, Administrator Lisa Jackson said that she would be taking steps to correct the situation. Thereafter, rather than fix the problem, Jackson decided to move Higginbotham to another position and appoint Rafael DeLeon as the new Director of Civil Rights. The obvious connection between the two, Higginbotham and DeLeon, was their mentor, the previous Deputy Chief of Staff Ray Spears, who retired after the fiasco with Higginbotham. We heard it through the grapevine that Spears was willing to fall on his sword and retire for Higginbotham. Jackson spoke highly of Spears at his retirement ceremony in spite of all the ethical questions surrounding the Administrator's awards program headed by Spears in which he overturned the panel to give Higginbotham an award so she could later receive a hefty performance bonus over the protests of the civil rights staff members and her obvious nonperformance. One rumor was that Jackson made a commitment to Spears to take care of his two friends if he agreed to retire. His appointment was a slap in the face for civil rights and women that caused major protests.
DeLeon was scarred already having been removed as the Director of Human Resources based on serious allegations and an investigation. He was eventually removed from that position and the building, shifting him from one office to another. At the time, the grapevine was buzzing that DeLeon was being fired, but instead was being saved because the then Administrator Stephen Johnson, a die-hard supporter of Spears, said to the deciding officials, "We don't do things like that at EPA." Johnson, a long-term EPA career employee, was appointed as the EPA Administrator under the Busch administration, after which he announced that as long as he were the Administrator, his pal Spears would be with him. So, going after one of Spear's mentors was not done - but, everyone else appeared to be fair game, particularly some senior EPA women.
What better place to put DeLeon but reporting to his mentor Spears? How much trouble could he get into when it was public knowledge that he and Spears went out for drinks after hours on a regular basis and were personally close friends? Then, together, with the assistance of Higginbotham and one of her subordinates, they engaged in a Reasonable Accommodation and Civil Rights "Catch 22" with Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo to remove her from EPA. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo had won a jury award in 2001 against EPA for retaliation and was directly involved in the passage of the 2002 No Fear Act by Congress. After her "win," it was business as usual at EPA, so Spears had Coleman-Adebayo moved under his supervision, then after successfully working under her first line female supervisor, DeLeon was transferred in as her supervisor and the web was being spun. EPA has numerous scientists, but it didn't take one of their scientists to see what was going on or determine the outcome. Interestingly, the dynamic Spears-DeLeon duo was involved in the first Coleman-Adebayo case a decade before, as part of the losing team, but let's not let conflicts of interest trouble us. No worries about reprisal or retaliation here either. Violations of law, prohibited personnel practices, false allegations, findings of retaliation, passage of a civil rights law, findings from the Office of Special Counsel, protests, marches, horrendous reports -- nothing seems to bother EPA or its Administrators. Trying to get help outside the agency won't work either, when the problems are inside.
Low and behold, Higginbotham then got in serious trouble for years of nonperformance. What better solution than to move her to another position in the Administrator's office and replace her with DeLeon as the Director of Civil Rights? Protesting his appointment does not seem to faze this crowd or the Administrator either (see signs with "Rafael Must Go" at OccupyEPA protests and rallies). In the interim, the nonperformer, Higginbotham, and her mentor, Spears, were going after one of the main protagonists in the Office of Civil Rights, Susan Morris, one of three Assistant Directors reporting to Higginbotham. With a long and distinguished career in management and civil rights with industry and government, Morris attempted to make EPA a model program by developing numerous policies, programs, plans and procedures. Her work in four Federal departments was highly regardedand recognized for which she received numerous awards inclluding the Meritorious Civilian Service Medal, Superior Civilian Service award, among others. Her outstanding performance at EPA did not go unpunished. Under Higginbotham's supervision, Morris alleges that she was treated disparately, systematically isolated, disparaged, harassed, and even libeled. Her daily environment (and that of her eight staff members) was extremely hostile, while they had to endure employees sleeping on the job, playing computer games, shopping on government time, late or "no show" employees and other infractions. Instead, she was subjected to a year-long intensive Inspector General's investigation (based on an anonymous letter) in which Higginbotham took the opportunity to accuse her falsely of various violations that were eventually disproven. Thereafter, Spears and Higginbotham suspended her, then working with the OGC (DeLeon's old stomping grounds) used the suspension as the first step in the process to end her career. This all took place after Morris met with Spears to request that he take appropriate action to fix the situation in OCR caused by Higginbotham. Of course, retaliation for whistleblowing is not a problem for EPA.
The Office of Special Counsel found that Morris was subjected to retaliation for whistleblowing, but as usual, EPA just dug in their heels under Administrator Jackson. Instead of taking action against the abusers and slackers, Jackson is willing to use taxpayer funds and staff resources to take Morris, Coleman-Adebayo, and others to District Court, while the nonperformers continue to get paid. Is it possible that President Obama is supporting women, while his political appointees are allowed to go after them and abuse them in his administration? Is there a reason his administration did not step in to stop the abuses that started under the previous administration and are continuing through his? Is there a reason why he would allow Alicia Dabney, an American Indian woman, to be abused by the men in the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and when she protests these horrendous abuses, be fired? Is there a reason why he would allow EPA to take Morris to District Court for exposing civil rights violations and prohibited personnel practices? Is there a reason why he is allowing EPA to continue against three former Office of Civil Rights women (White, Black and Asian) in order to support Spears, Higginbotham and DeLeon? Is there any reason why he wants EPA to take Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo to District Court again for Johnson and his cronies?
Americans have asked that President Obama "walk his talk," otherwise his support of women, including those under his administration and care, is just more campaign rhetoric before an election. They just don't know what they are doing. It's as simple as that or is it?
Let's see if we have this right? The former Director, Karen Higginbotham, sat in the office for over 10 years having been moved there from the EPA contracting office. She was appointed as the Director of Civil Rights and given a Senior Executive Service position with the assistance and blessing of her mentor, Ray Spears, in the beginning of 2000, where she sat until she was removed following public exposure for failing to process environmental community complaints (some for over a decade), failing to submit mandatory Congressional and EEOC reports for years, failing to timely process internal employee complaints, and generally creating havoc and dissention within the office. Read the Deloitte Consulting report and review found above that cost taxpayers $350,000 and the rebuttal by Susan Morris, an expert in civil rights and former Assistant Director in that office.
To fix this public embarrassment, Administrator Lisa Jackson said that she would be taking steps to correct the situation. Thereafter, rather than fix the problem, Jackson decided to move Higginbotham to another position and appoint Rafael DeLeon as the new Director of Civil Rights. The obvious connection between the two, Higginbotham and DeLeon, was their mentor, the previous Deputy Chief of Staff Ray Spears, who retired after the fiasco with Higginbotham. We heard it through the grapevine that Spears was willing to fall on his sword and retire for Higginbotham. Jackson spoke highly of Spears at his retirement ceremony in spite of all the ethical questions surrounding the Administrator's awards program headed by Spears in which he overturned the panel to give Higginbotham an award so she could later receive a hefty performance bonus over the protests of the civil rights staff members and her obvious nonperformance. One rumor was that Jackson made a commitment to Spears to take care of his two friends if he agreed to retire. His appointment was a slap in the face for civil rights and women that caused major protests.
DeLeon was scarred already having been removed as the Director of Human Resources based on serious allegations and an investigation. He was eventually removed from that position and the building, shifting him from one office to another. At the time, the grapevine was buzzing that DeLeon was being fired, but instead was being saved because the then Administrator Stephen Johnson, a die-hard supporter of Spears, said to the deciding officials, "We don't do things like that at EPA." Johnson, a long-term EPA career employee, was appointed as the EPA Administrator under the Busch administration, after which he announced that as long as he were the Administrator, his pal Spears would be with him. So, going after one of Spear's mentors was not done - but, everyone else appeared to be fair game, particularly some senior EPA women.
What better place to put DeLeon but reporting to his mentor Spears? How much trouble could he get into when it was public knowledge that he and Spears went out for drinks after hours on a regular basis and were personally close friends? Then, together, with the assistance of Higginbotham and one of her subordinates, they engaged in a Reasonable Accommodation and Civil Rights "Catch 22" with Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo to remove her from EPA. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo had won a jury award in 2001 against EPA for retaliation and was directly involved in the passage of the 2002 No Fear Act by Congress. After her "win," it was business as usual at EPA, so Spears had Coleman-Adebayo moved under his supervision, then after successfully working under her first line female supervisor, DeLeon was transferred in as her supervisor and the web was being spun. EPA has numerous scientists, but it didn't take one of their scientists to see what was going on or determine the outcome. Interestingly, the dynamic Spears-DeLeon duo was involved in the first Coleman-Adebayo case a decade before, as part of the losing team, but let's not let conflicts of interest trouble us. No worries about reprisal or retaliation here either. Violations of law, prohibited personnel practices, false allegations, findings of retaliation, passage of a civil rights law, findings from the Office of Special Counsel, protests, marches, horrendous reports -- nothing seems to bother EPA or its Administrators. Trying to get help outside the agency won't work either, when the problems are inside.
Low and behold, Higginbotham then got in serious trouble for years of nonperformance. What better solution than to move her to another position in the Administrator's office and replace her with DeLeon as the Director of Civil Rights? Protesting his appointment does not seem to faze this crowd or the Administrator either (see signs with "Rafael Must Go" at OccupyEPA protests and rallies). In the interim, the nonperformer, Higginbotham, and her mentor, Spears, were going after one of the main protagonists in the Office of Civil Rights, Susan Morris, one of three Assistant Directors reporting to Higginbotham. With a long and distinguished career in management and civil rights with industry and government, Morris attempted to make EPA a model program by developing numerous policies, programs, plans and procedures. Her work in four Federal departments was highly regardedand recognized for which she received numerous awards inclluding the Meritorious Civilian Service Medal, Superior Civilian Service award, among others. Her outstanding performance at EPA did not go unpunished. Under Higginbotham's supervision, Morris alleges that she was treated disparately, systematically isolated, disparaged, harassed, and even libeled. Her daily environment (and that of her eight staff members) was extremely hostile, while they had to endure employees sleeping on the job, playing computer games, shopping on government time, late or "no show" employees and other infractions. Instead, she was subjected to a year-long intensive Inspector General's investigation (based on an anonymous letter) in which Higginbotham took the opportunity to accuse her falsely of various violations that were eventually disproven. Thereafter, Spears and Higginbotham suspended her, then working with the OGC (DeLeon's old stomping grounds) used the suspension as the first step in the process to end her career. This all took place after Morris met with Spears to request that he take appropriate action to fix the situation in OCR caused by Higginbotham. Of course, retaliation for whistleblowing is not a problem for EPA.
The Office of Special Counsel found that Morris was subjected to retaliation for whistleblowing, but as usual, EPA just dug in their heels under Administrator Jackson. Instead of taking action against the abusers and slackers, Jackson is willing to use taxpayer funds and staff resources to take Morris, Coleman-Adebayo, and others to District Court, while the nonperformers continue to get paid. Is it possible that President Obama is supporting women, while his political appointees are allowed to go after them and abuse them in his administration? Is there a reason his administration did not step in to stop the abuses that started under the previous administration and are continuing through his? Is there a reason why he would allow Alicia Dabney, an American Indian woman, to be abused by the men in the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and when she protests these horrendous abuses, be fired? Is there a reason why he would allow EPA to take Morris to District Court for exposing civil rights violations and prohibited personnel practices? Is there a reason why he is allowing EPA to continue against three former Office of Civil Rights women (White, Black and Asian) in order to support Spears, Higginbotham and DeLeon? Is there any reason why he wants EPA to take Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo to District Court again for Johnson and his cronies?
Americans have asked that President Obama "walk his talk," otherwise his support of women, including those under his administration and care, is just more campaign rhetoric before an election. They just don't know what they are doing. It's as simple as that or is it?
FBI and DOJ - CASE REVIEW June 12, 2012
Summary: Readers of The Washington Post found out this morning that the FBI and DOJ are launching the largest post-conviction case review in American
history. Readers of the Whistleblower Protection Blog know that this review should have begun twenty years ago...
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/whistleblowers-government-empl/fbi/twenty-years-later-doj-finally-admits-mistakes/index.html
history. Readers of the Whistleblower Protection Blog know that this review should have begun twenty years ago...
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/07/articles/whistleblowers-government-empl/fbi/twenty-years-later-doj-finally-admits-mistakes/index.html
Green Party Female Candidate for Presidency June 12, 2012
There is a woman running for the presidency. See the Green Party candidate at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/us/politics/jill-stein-green-party-candidate-and-the-chances-of-making-a-difference.html?_r=1&hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/us/politics/jill-stein-green-party-candidate-and-the-chances-of-making-a-difference.html?_r=1&hp
THEY FIRED ME!!!
From: Alicia Dabney <featherhvn@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thu, May 31, 2012 1:23 pm
They fired me!
Alicia Dabney
232 n reservation rd
Porterville Ca 93257
Listen to what this Federal employee has to put up with and then gets fired - it's unbelieveable! So where is the concern in the Obama Administration for women or is it just more rhetoric? These are his political appointees letting this stuff go on. How would you like your mother, sister, daughter or granddaughter treated to this type of disgusting behavior in the Federal government and then be fired for speaking out?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjZwLEFLAhI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent: Thu, May 31, 2012 1:23 pm
They fired me!
Alicia Dabney
232 n reservation rd
Porterville Ca 93257
Listen to what this Federal employee has to put up with and then gets fired - it's unbelieveable! So where is the concern in the Obama Administration for women or is it just more rhetoric? These are his political appointees letting this stuff go on. How would you like your mother, sister, daughter or granddaughter treated to this type of disgusting behavior in the Federal government and then be fired for speaking out?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjZwLEFLAhI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
The EPA Never Learns - Where is Lisa P. Jackson in all this and who is she protecting?
The civil rights system is in place to ensure that aggrieved employees who allege they have been discriminated against are heard and protected from retaliation for engaging in the process. As in many agencies throughout Washington DC, the civil rights programs have become seriously distorted in favor of management. The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Office of Special Counsel (OSC), and other agencies with the responsibility to protect whistle blowers and complainants have become disincentives because they find so often in favor of management. This has been reported by numerous watchdog groups to no avail. The use of unlimited taxpayer money and internal/external lawyers in D.C. has allowed this to continue unabated for decades.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an agency with 17,800 employees, $8 billiion dollars and 1,000 lawyers, is a prime example of what is wrong with the civil rights program and what it is costing taxpayers for allowing it to run amouk for decades. A report by Holland & Knight Consulting, after a significant finding of discrimination against EPA by a jury against senior analyst Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo in 2001, and a report by Deloitte Consulting a decade later in March 2011 include the total failure of EPA to follow the nation's civil rights policies, laws and regulations. The Deloitte findings and conclusions showed that the entire internal and external EPA civil rights program was dysfunctional and included: inadequate adjudication of Title VI complaints addressing allegations of discrimination against communities of citizens adversely affected environmentally; untimely and ineffective tracking, investigation, and resolution of discrimination complaints by employees and applicants under Title VII; failure to complete compliance reviews of EPA grantees for nondiscrimination; and failure to file mandatory reports for years. In response, the Administrator of EPA, Lisa P. Jackson, transferred the Director of Civil Rights, Karen Higginbotham, into another position and replaced her with Rafael DeLeon, who had previously been removed as the EPA Director of Human Resources. Since then, the untimely processing of complaints has increased significantly, numerous women have filed complaints (with two in District Court), OSC found retaliation in two whistleblower cases, and more complaints are going through the system.
So where is the Obama Administration in all of this and, specifically, his political appointee, Administrator Lisa P. Jackson? The policy of the nation is to resolve complaints at the earliest possible time within the process, or before an aggrieved employee files a formal complaint. The resolution and/or settlement of complaints represents a significant cost and resources savings for the government, since the average cost is $150,000/complaint at the administrative level, without considering those in District Court. Years ago, an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program was required in order to assist in increasing resolution of discrimination complaints. In their wisdom, EPA placed the ADR program in the Office of General Counsel so that it did not work from the inception. Employees were not willing to believe that they would get a fair and impartial review of their case in the office responsible for defending the agency and management. The program has been moved several times, but the mistrust was already established and an attorney in Employee Labor Relations was last assigned to handle matters. Is it any wonder that EPA has a low resolution rate for complaints and continues to get caught with findings of discrimination and retaliation, along with public exposure? As stated succinctly by renowned professor, linguist and civil rights advocate, Noam Chomsky, EPA's civil rights history is abysmal and their track record includes failing to timely process complaints, retaliating against whistleblowers and complainants, supporting violators, ignoring findings by the Office of Special Counsel and MSPB, and filing appeals on decisions that are in favor of complainants. Using unlimited taxpayer money, with 1,000 attorneys at their disposal, the leadership ignores the problems unless they become a public scandal as in the cases of Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA and Marsha Coleman-Adebayo v EPA. The 2002 No Fear Act, requiring more stringent civil rights and whistleblower requirements on Federal agencies, was a direct result of EPA's retaliation against Dr. Coleman-Adebayo. More recently, EPA was required to return a senior female employee to the agency and her position because of retaliation; the Administrator received two findings of retaliation against whistleblowers by OSC; Dr. Coleman-Adebayo is back in District Court along with other senior women; and EPA continues to squander funds retaliating against their own employees and community groups. It's a sad commentary on an agency that has been charged with protecting the public from pollution when it cannot even protect their own employees, particularly women and minorities, from abuse.
Thus far, Administrator Lisa Jackson has ignored major protests from OccupyEPAers, whistleblowers, women and minorities, while her boss, President Obama, attempts to gain support from these same groups during his reelection bid. Evidently his message has not gotten to the EPA Administrator and her leadership. Following is just one more example of EPA's position on discrimination, with more to come, that is costing taxpayers at a time when the country cannot afford it . . . . . . . .
Subject: EPA ordered to pay employee $100,000 compensatory damages, legal fees and more
Yolanda R. Guess, Complainant, v. Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, EPA, EEOC-OFO Appeal No. 0720110029; Hearing No. 520-2009-00182X; Agency No. 2008-0054-R02, June 12, 2012; Full Text DECISION (NOTE: EPA's adverse and recalcitrant position on civil rights and complainants is underlined for the reader, along with their leaning towards industry)
Following its May 9, 2011, final order, the Agency filed a timely appeal which the Commission accepts pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a). On appeal, the Agency requests that the Commission affirm its rejection of an EEOC Administrative Judge's (AJ) finding of discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The Agency also requests that the Commission affirm its rejection of the relief ordered by the AS. For the following reasons, the Commission REVERSES the Agency's final order.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Whether the EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) erred when she found that Complainant proved by a preponderance of evidence that she was discriminated against on the basis of reprisal when she was subjected to a lateral reassignment in retaliation for engaging protected EEO activity.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Project Officer (PO), GS-13 at the Agency's Region 2 Office in Edison, New Jersey. She was one of nine POs responsible for the Environmental Service and Assistance Team (ESAT) contract. From 2000 to 2007, the ESAT contract was with Lockheed Martin. In
2007, the contract was rebid to ALION. In addition to Complainant's first-line and second-line supervisors (S1 and S2.) who worked at her location, she also worked with a Contract Officer (CO) and Laboratory Analytical Service Center Manager (LAM) who were located at the Agency's headquarters in Washington, D.C. Complainant maintains that, on March 27, 2008, she received a telephone call from the CO where he yelled at her and was rude to her regarding delays in the ALION invoices, he told her to just "rubber stamp" the invoices or he would terminate her employment. She asserts that it is against the law for her to just "rubber stamp" invoices and because she was responsible for the contract she needed to make sure that everything was correct. She maintains that she felt forced to participate in unethical and unprofessional practices that would jeopardize her position. Complainant maintained that the CO would not have talked to her that way if she was a male. She sent CO an email to discuss his behavior toward her. SI sent Complainant an email telling her that her email to CO was rude and SI called her a "smart ass." S1 had previously yelled at her and called her an "a-hole" in approximately 2001 or 2002.
Complainant maintains that S1 would not have yelled at a Caucasian woman under his supervision the way he yelled at her. She also indicates that he also favored
Caucasian women when it came to performance awards. She maintains that there were many derogatory emails passed between management regarding her processing
of the ESAT contract. Complainant indicates that she received several more very abusive phone calls from CO where he accused her of creating her own requirements for the ESAT program. Again, he complained that Complainant was not processing contract invoices in a timely fashion. The CO maintained that Complainant failed to inform ALION what follow-up documentation was needed and when they provided the information, Complainant continued to assert that the provided codes were questionable. While ALION was threatening to sue over timeliness issues, the LAM noted that ALION had not "fully mobilized" in accordance with their mobilization plan, and a "Cure Notice"' was therefore issued (*Cure Notices require contractors to complete their financial documentation.)
Complainant contacted the EEO office on April 9, 2008; thereafter, she maintained that shewas required to keep several layers of management apprised on her work.
Moreover, she maintains that her work began to be reviewed by two supervisors,she was micromanaged, she was given double the work and she was audited twice.
On May 8 or 9, 2008, the LAM went to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG),Complainant believed that this was done so that an investigation could be started on her. The LAM maintained that this visit did not have anything to dowith Complainant. However, on May 13, 2008, Complainant was audited by OIG. She believed that this was done to uncover deficiencies in her work. The director of the audit however, provided testimony that Complainant was not singled out as all delinquent contracts were audited and Complainant's selection was simply due to the untimeliness of her contract. The audit uncovered no problems with Complainant's work. A second audit was thereafter conducted on Region 2. The director testified that this audit was conducted because Region 2 was being considered as a model.
Complainant indicates that from 2005 through March 27, 2008, she received performance appraisals of Exceeds Expectations. In October 2008, however she received a lower rating of "Fully Successful." In May 2009, the LAM wrote a letter to Complainant's then supervisor (S1A) indicating that Complainant's performance should improve or Complainant should be replaced. SIA did not share this information with Complainant. Complainant was not put on a performance improvement plan and no meeting was held with Complainant and Human Resources regarding performance concerns. In June 2009, Complainant wasreassigned to the position of "Senior Quality Assurance," which, she maintained, was essentially a data entry position. S2 indicated that Complainant was reassigned at the direction of Headquarters. Headquarters provided three reasons for the reassignment. They were: (1) ALION was threatening to sue, (2) Complainant had communication issues, and (3) she had not attended the national 2008 PO conference and meetings in June 2008 and May 2009.
Complainant alleges that she was transferred as a result of reprisal for filing her EEO complaint. She maintains that she went from managing multibillion/multimillion dollar contracts to being a data entry clerk. Complainant contends that she was known as being diligent about her work and a hard worker and this reassignment was devastating to her career and the way in which she was viewed in the office. She maintains that she was the subject of gossip and management gloated about her removal from her position. She also maintains that her coworkers were shocked that this happened to her. Complainant notes that this was not the first time that this type of thing had
happened as another female employee was also reassigned following the filing an EEO complaint.
Therefore, on June 18, 2008, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African-American), sex (female), and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when:
1. On May 13, 2008, management assigned an official from the financial audit staff to review her work processing for the ESAT Program;
2. On April 17, 2008, her work activities were micromanaged and she was treated less favorably by management than her colleagues;
3. On April 4, 2008, management yelled at her, used abusive and offensive language on the telephone and made aggressive gestures that frightened her;
4. From March 27, 2008, to May 13, 2008, she was subjected to a hostile work environment when management consistently scrutinized her work, sent her offensive and defamatory emails as well as telephone calls, and forced her to participate in unethical and unprofessional practices that would jeopardize her position; and
5. During the hearing, Complainant alleged that she was subjected to reprisal when she was reassigned to a Senior Quality Assurance worker, which was basically a data entry position.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing and the AJ held a hearing on May 27 and 28, 2010, and issued a decision on March 9, 2011. The AJ held that Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment based on sex because she did not establish that she was treated differently than similarly-situated employees. Similarly, Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of harassment based on gender because she presented insufficient evidence to suggest that that the conduct complained of was connected in any way to her sex.
The AJ also found that Complainant failed to show that she was subjected to discrimination based on race. Specifically, the AJ found that assuming arguendo that Complainant established a prima facie case of race discrimination, the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions, namely that it was reasonable for a supervisor to become involved in a contract where legal action was threatened, there was no evidence of differential treatment between performance award recipients, and Complainant failed to show that the alleged name calling was motivated by race. The A3 found that the fact that Si was cold toward Complainant was insufficient to support an inference of racial discrimination. The A] found that Complainant did not provide sufficient evidence to show that the Agency's articulated reasons were pretext for discrimination. Similarly, the A3 found that Complainant did not present evidence to prove by a preponderance of evidence that the alleged harassment was due to her race as she had failed to show that she was subjected to discrimination based on race.
The AJ also found that Complainant failed to establish a causal connection between her EEO activity and the May 13, 2008 audit, the April 17, 2008, micro-managing and less favorable treatment, the April 4, 2008 yelling and related behavior, and the hostile work environment claim from March 27 to May 13, 2008. The Ai noted that
these allegations occurred before the Agency was aware of Complainant's protected activity. However with respect to the transfer, the Al found that Complainant had been subjected to an adverse employment action when she was transferred from her position as a GS-13 PO to the position of a GS-13 Senior Quality Assurance. The A.1 noted that Complainant went from managing multibillion/multimillion dollar contracts to a data entry position after she filed an EEO complaint. And, even though the pay remained constant it was a "disadvantageous transfer" and was reasonably likely to deter employees from engaging in protected activity.
In response, the Agency indicated that Complainant was transferred due to her lack of sufficient technical expertise; inability or unwillingness to retain CO guidance; inability to provide clear and timely responses; unwillingness to work collaboratively; inability to consistently act professionally; and inability to avoid actions which created
the appearance of an improper personal services relationship. S I testified that Complainant was removed at the request of Headquarters due to communication
difficulties and because ALION was threatening legal action. S1 A indicated that Complainant was transferred because of communication issues and Complainant's
lack of attendance at the national 2008 PO conference and meetings in June 2008 and May 2009 about the ESAT contract.
Notwithstanding, the AJ found that Complainant established by a preponderance of the evidence that the Agency's articulated nondiscriminatory reasons were pretext for discrimination based on retaliation. Among other things, it was noted that the Agency's evaluations did not reflect that the transfer was necessitated by Complainant's performance as Complainant received Exceeds Expectations and Fully Successful ratings. Complainant's performance reviews did not show any problems with her work,
including the results of the May 13, 2008, audit which uncovered no problems with Complainant's work. Further, the second audit was conducted to determine if
Complainant's Region 2 should be used as a model. The AJ found additional evidence of pretext in that the Agency never communicated any alleged performance problems with Complainant and no meeting was ever held with Complainant and Human Resources about performance concerns. Moreover, there was positive testimony from multiple coworkers and the acting Branch Chief which addressed Complainant's work ethic and the quality of her work. It was noted that she was a good worker and coworkers were surprised when she was removed from her PO position. Accordingly, the AJ found that Complainant proved that the Agency's articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons were pretext for discrimination based on retaliation.
Therefore, the AJ concluded that Complainant failed to establish a disparate treatment and harassment claim based on her sex and race. The Al also found that Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation for the May 13, 2008 audit, the April 17, 2008, micro-managing and less favorable treatment, the April 4, 2007 yelling and related behavior, or the hostile work environment from March 27 to May 13, 2008 and related claims. With respect to the June 2009 transfer, the AJ found that the Agency articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for the transfer. However, the Al then determined that Complainant met her burden to show that the
Agency's reasons were not credible and were pretext for discrimination on the basis of reprisal for Complainant's protected activity.
The AJ issued an Interim Decision on July 12, 2010, finding discrimination and instructed the parties to provide information regarding damages. The AJ also ordered EEO
training for all responsible management officials involved, and the Agency was to post a notice of nondiscrimination. On March 9, 2011, the AJ awarded Complainant $100,000 in compensatory damages for humiliation, embarrassment, loss of enjoyment of life, and emotional harm as well as for physical manifestations of that harm as described by her (anxiety, depression, chest pain, shortness of breath, insomnia, crying, swelling in the eyes and weight gain and she was prescribed the antidepressant Zoloft), her family, friends, co-workers and her doctor. The Al found that this award of nonpecuniary compensatory damages was justified by the evidence in the record and the Commissions decisions.
Using the Lodestar, the AJ found that Complainant was entitled to reasonable attorney's fees of $410 per hour. The Agency argued that the attorney should not be entitled to fees as most of Complainant's claims were unsuccessful. In response, the attorney averred that the hours spent on the unsuccessful issues were deleted from the billing invoice. Notwithstanding the AJ found that the claim of retaliation was an accepted claim from which Complainant was successful on. Further she found that the claim was like and related to the claims in evidence. As such, the AJ did not find the Agency's argument credible and The AJ also awarded attorney's fees in the amount of
$73,660.46 were reasonable appropriate and justified in this case. Costs in the amount of $871.79 were also granted as reasonable.
Thereafter, the Agency filed a motion for reconsideration regarding damages, attorney's fees, and the finding of liability against the Agency for the claim of retaliatory
removal of Complainant from her Project Officer position. The Agency argued that it was unable to develop the record on the issue of retaliation regarding Complainant's transfer because it was taken by surprise. The AJ found this argument to be untenable as this issue had been discussed during discovery, in a pretrial conference, in Complainant's submissions to the Agency on February 22, 2010, in Complainant's witness testimony prior to the hearing, in opening statements at the hearing, during the witness testimony at the hearing, and in the attorney's closing arguments. The AJ found that the Agency addressed this issue throughout the process without objection. Therefore, the AJ denied the Agency's motion for reconsideration.
The Agency subsequently issued a final order rejecting the AJ's finding that Complainant proved that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged. The Agency also objected to the compensatory damages awarded in this case.
CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL
On appeal, the Agency argues that the AJ erred when she found that the Complainant established that the June 10, 2009, lateral reassignment was based
on retaliation. The Agency argues that there is substantial evidence in the record which demonstrates that Complainant's laieral reassignment :vas based on
the performance deficiencies set forth in the case. rr1.432, LL _ Agency maintains that the supervisors' assessment of Complainant's performance should be the controlling factor in this case.
The Agency also does not concur with the AJ's award of non-pecuniary compensatory damages because it is "monstrously excessive" and is not consistent with amounts awarded in similar cases. The Agency argues that this finding is not supported by the AJ's own subsidiary findings of fact, substantial evidence in the record and
Commission precedent. The Agency argues that assuming arguendo that the AJ did not err, the damages are excessive and should be in the range of $2,000 plus.
In response, Complainant argues that the AJ's decision finding discrimination should be upheld. Complainant notes that the Agency had not implemented any of the relief ordered. Further, Complainant's counsel respectfully requests that the Commission recalculate the attorney fee award as her current Laffey_ matrix rate that had been increased to $420 per hour in January 2011.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by an AJ will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence is defined as "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board,
340 U.S. 474, 477 (1951) (citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not discriminatory intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982). An AJ's conclusions of law are subject to a de novo standard of review, whether or not a hearing was held. An AJ's credibility determination based on the demeanor of a witness or on the tone of voice of a witness will be accepted unless documents or other objective evidence so contradicts the testimony or the testimony so lacks in credibility that a reasonable fact finder would not credit it. See EEOC Management Directive 110, Chapter 9, at § VI.B. (November 9, 1999).
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
We note that the Commission has the discretion to review only those issues specifically raised in an appeal. Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, 9-10 (November 9, 1999). In the instant case the Commission finds that the Agency failed to show that the AJ erred with respect to the finding that Complainant was discriminated against on the basis of retaliation when she was transferred to a new position. The Commission finds that the AJ was correct in determining that even though the Agency articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions, i.e., that Complainant was transferred due to performance problems, the Complainant showed that those reasons were pretext for discriminatory animus as the AJ correctly found that no performance problems were ever communicated to Complainant. Also, the AJ noted that Complainant was thought of very highly by those who worked alongside her. Moreover, her performance was ranked as Exceeds Expectations and Fully Successful during this time. Accordingly, we find that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the AJ's findings here.
With regard to the Agency's contention that the award of non-pecuniary compensatory damages was excessive in this case, we again find that the Agency failed to establish that the AJ erred. The record shows that as a result of discrimination Complainant experienced humiliation, embarrassment, gossip, ridicule, as well as the physical manifestations of stress and anxiety. Complainant's damages are supported by the record through affidavit testimony from, family, friends, coworkers, and her doctor. Additionally, the award of $100,000 for these types of damages is consistent with Commission precedent as is clearly listed in the AJ's decision. Other than not wanting to pay the amount ordered, we find that the Agency has not provided a persuasive argument as to why the amount of the damages should be lowered.
Finally, Complainant's request that her attorney be paid according to the current Leffey matrix rate of $420 per hour instead of the $4l0 that was used to calculate attorney's fees. The attorney showed that her rate had been increased as of January 2011. As noted above, the AJ's award of damages took place on March 9, 2011. 2 The Commission finds that the $420 rate is the correct rate as this rate was the current rate at the time of the decision. Therefore, the Agency will be ordered to recalculate attorney's fees using the $420 amount.
CONCLUSION
The Commission has previously determined that the proper customary hourly rate is the reasonable hourly rate in effect at the time of the award, not at the time services are provided. See Mareno v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 01943104 (February 14, 1996).
Based on a thorough review of the record and the contentions on appeal, including those not specifically addressed herein, we REVERSE the Agency's Final Order which found that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination based on reprisal when she was transferred from her PO position. We find that substantial evidence supports the AJ's finding of discrimination based on reprisal with respect to the transfer.
ORDER
The agency is order to take the following remedial action:
1. Within 45 (forty-five) calendar days of the date of this decision, the Agency is ordered to pay Complainant $100,000 in nonpecuniary compensatory damages.
Within 45 (forty-five) calendar days of the date of this decision, the Agency is order to recalculate and pay attorney's fees using the $420 approved rate. The Agency is also ordered to pay costs in the amount of $871.79.
2. The Agency shall immediately take corrective action to ensure such discriminatory actions by and from its supervisors, managers, and all other staff involved in decisions affecting employment, will not recur, including providing 32 hours of mandatory training to all management involved on the rights of employees under Title VII, the obligations of management and personnel staff to insure that those rights are protected, and the possible relief (both disciplinary by the Agency and statutorily from the Commission or the courts) available to such employees against management or personnel staff who discriminate.
3. The Agency shall post the enclosed notice, pursuant to the paragraph below entitled, "Posting Order."
4. The Agency shall consider taking appropriate disciplinary action against the responsible management officials. The Commission does not consider training to be
disciplinary action. The Agency shall report its decision to the EEOC compliance officer. If the Agency decides to take disciplinary action, it shall identify the action taken. If the Agency decides not to take disciplinary action, it shall set forth the reason(s) for its decision not to impose discipline. If any of the responsible management officials have left the Agency's employ, the Agency shall provide documentation of their departure date(s).
The Agency is further directed to submit a report of compliance, as provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision." The report
shall include supporting documentation verifying that the corrective action has been implemented.
POSTING ORDER (60900)
The Agency is ordered to post at its Region 2, Headquarters facility in Edison, New Jersey copies of the attached notice. Copies of the notice, after being signed by the agency's duly authorized representative, shall be posted by the agency within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, and shall remain posted
for sixty (60) consecutive days, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. The agency shall take reasonable steps to ensure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. The original signed notice is to be submitted to the Compliance Officer at the address cited in the paragraph entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision," within ten (10) calendar days of the expiration of the posting period.
ATTORNEY'S FEES (H0610)
If Complainant has been represented by an attorney (as defined by 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(e)(1)(iii)), he/she is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees incurred in the processing of the complaint. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(e). The award of attorney's fees shall be paid by the Agency. The attorney shall submit a verified statement of fees to the Agency -not to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Office of federal Operations -- within thirty (30) calendar days of this decision becoming final. The Agency shall then process the claim for attorney's fees in accordance with 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)
Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory. The Agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of all
ordered corrective action. The report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. The Agency's report must contain supporting documentation, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant. If the Agency does not comply with the Commission's order, the Complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(a). The Complainant also has the right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(g). Alternatively, the Complainant has the right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File a Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. §§ 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying
complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0610)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this case if the Complainant or the Agency submits a written request containing arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed with the Office of Federal Operations (0F0) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. In the absence of a legible postmark, the request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include proof of service on the other party.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(c).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0610)
This is a decision requiring the Agency to continue its administrative processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil action, you have the right to
file such action in an appropriate United States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date you filed your complaint with the Agency, or filed your appeal with the Commission. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official Agency head or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. Filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791,794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File a Civil Action").
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an agency with 17,800 employees, $8 billiion dollars and 1,000 lawyers, is a prime example of what is wrong with the civil rights program and what it is costing taxpayers for allowing it to run amouk for decades. A report by Holland & Knight Consulting, after a significant finding of discrimination against EPA by a jury against senior analyst Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo in 2001, and a report by Deloitte Consulting a decade later in March 2011 include the total failure of EPA to follow the nation's civil rights policies, laws and regulations. The Deloitte findings and conclusions showed that the entire internal and external EPA civil rights program was dysfunctional and included: inadequate adjudication of Title VI complaints addressing allegations of discrimination against communities of citizens adversely affected environmentally; untimely and ineffective tracking, investigation, and resolution of discrimination complaints by employees and applicants under Title VII; failure to complete compliance reviews of EPA grantees for nondiscrimination; and failure to file mandatory reports for years. In response, the Administrator of EPA, Lisa P. Jackson, transferred the Director of Civil Rights, Karen Higginbotham, into another position and replaced her with Rafael DeLeon, who had previously been removed as the EPA Director of Human Resources. Since then, the untimely processing of complaints has increased significantly, numerous women have filed complaints (with two in District Court), OSC found retaliation in two whistleblower cases, and more complaints are going through the system.
So where is the Obama Administration in all of this and, specifically, his political appointee, Administrator Lisa P. Jackson? The policy of the nation is to resolve complaints at the earliest possible time within the process, or before an aggrieved employee files a formal complaint. The resolution and/or settlement of complaints represents a significant cost and resources savings for the government, since the average cost is $150,000/complaint at the administrative level, without considering those in District Court. Years ago, an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program was required in order to assist in increasing resolution of discrimination complaints. In their wisdom, EPA placed the ADR program in the Office of General Counsel so that it did not work from the inception. Employees were not willing to believe that they would get a fair and impartial review of their case in the office responsible for defending the agency and management. The program has been moved several times, but the mistrust was already established and an attorney in Employee Labor Relations was last assigned to handle matters. Is it any wonder that EPA has a low resolution rate for complaints and continues to get caught with findings of discrimination and retaliation, along with public exposure? As stated succinctly by renowned professor, linguist and civil rights advocate, Noam Chomsky, EPA's civil rights history is abysmal and their track record includes failing to timely process complaints, retaliating against whistleblowers and complainants, supporting violators, ignoring findings by the Office of Special Counsel and MSPB, and filing appeals on decisions that are in favor of complainants. Using unlimited taxpayer money, with 1,000 attorneys at their disposal, the leadership ignores the problems unless they become a public scandal as in the cases of Rosemere Neighborhood Association v EPA and Marsha Coleman-Adebayo v EPA. The 2002 No Fear Act, requiring more stringent civil rights and whistleblower requirements on Federal agencies, was a direct result of EPA's retaliation against Dr. Coleman-Adebayo. More recently, EPA was required to return a senior female employee to the agency and her position because of retaliation; the Administrator received two findings of retaliation against whistleblowers by OSC; Dr. Coleman-Adebayo is back in District Court along with other senior women; and EPA continues to squander funds retaliating against their own employees and community groups. It's a sad commentary on an agency that has been charged with protecting the public from pollution when it cannot even protect their own employees, particularly women and minorities, from abuse.
Thus far, Administrator Lisa Jackson has ignored major protests from OccupyEPAers, whistleblowers, women and minorities, while her boss, President Obama, attempts to gain support from these same groups during his reelection bid. Evidently his message has not gotten to the EPA Administrator and her leadership. Following is just one more example of EPA's position on discrimination, with more to come, that is costing taxpayers at a time when the country cannot afford it . . . . . . . .
Subject: EPA ordered to pay employee $100,000 compensatory damages, legal fees and more
Yolanda R. Guess, Complainant, v. Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, EPA, EEOC-OFO Appeal No. 0720110029; Hearing No. 520-2009-00182X; Agency No. 2008-0054-R02, June 12, 2012; Full Text DECISION (NOTE: EPA's adverse and recalcitrant position on civil rights and complainants is underlined for the reader, along with their leaning towards industry)
Following its May 9, 2011, final order, the Agency filed a timely appeal which the Commission accepts pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a). On appeal, the Agency requests that the Commission affirm its rejection of an EEOC Administrative Judge's (AJ) finding of discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The Agency also requests that the Commission affirm its rejection of the relief ordered by the AS. For the following reasons, the Commission REVERSES the Agency's final order.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Whether the EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) erred when she found that Complainant proved by a preponderance of evidence that she was discriminated against on the basis of reprisal when she was subjected to a lateral reassignment in retaliation for engaging protected EEO activity.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Project Officer (PO), GS-13 at the Agency's Region 2 Office in Edison, New Jersey. She was one of nine POs responsible for the Environmental Service and Assistance Team (ESAT) contract. From 2000 to 2007, the ESAT contract was with Lockheed Martin. In
2007, the contract was rebid to ALION. In addition to Complainant's first-line and second-line supervisors (S1 and S2.) who worked at her location, she also worked with a Contract Officer (CO) and Laboratory Analytical Service Center Manager (LAM) who were located at the Agency's headquarters in Washington, D.C. Complainant maintains that, on March 27, 2008, she received a telephone call from the CO where he yelled at her and was rude to her regarding delays in the ALION invoices, he told her to just "rubber stamp" the invoices or he would terminate her employment. She asserts that it is against the law for her to just "rubber stamp" invoices and because she was responsible for the contract she needed to make sure that everything was correct. She maintains that she felt forced to participate in unethical and unprofessional practices that would jeopardize her position. Complainant maintained that the CO would not have talked to her that way if she was a male. She sent CO an email to discuss his behavior toward her. SI sent Complainant an email telling her that her email to CO was rude and SI called her a "smart ass." S1 had previously yelled at her and called her an "a-hole" in approximately 2001 or 2002.
Complainant maintains that S1 would not have yelled at a Caucasian woman under his supervision the way he yelled at her. She also indicates that he also favored
Caucasian women when it came to performance awards. She maintains that there were many derogatory emails passed between management regarding her processing
of the ESAT contract. Complainant indicates that she received several more very abusive phone calls from CO where he accused her of creating her own requirements for the ESAT program. Again, he complained that Complainant was not processing contract invoices in a timely fashion. The CO maintained that Complainant failed to inform ALION what follow-up documentation was needed and when they provided the information, Complainant continued to assert that the provided codes were questionable. While ALION was threatening to sue over timeliness issues, the LAM noted that ALION had not "fully mobilized" in accordance with their mobilization plan, and a "Cure Notice"' was therefore issued (*Cure Notices require contractors to complete their financial documentation.)
Complainant contacted the EEO office on April 9, 2008; thereafter, she maintained that shewas required to keep several layers of management apprised on her work.
Moreover, she maintains that her work began to be reviewed by two supervisors,she was micromanaged, she was given double the work and she was audited twice.
On May 8 or 9, 2008, the LAM went to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG),Complainant believed that this was done so that an investigation could be started on her. The LAM maintained that this visit did not have anything to dowith Complainant. However, on May 13, 2008, Complainant was audited by OIG. She believed that this was done to uncover deficiencies in her work. The director of the audit however, provided testimony that Complainant was not singled out as all delinquent contracts were audited and Complainant's selection was simply due to the untimeliness of her contract. The audit uncovered no problems with Complainant's work. A second audit was thereafter conducted on Region 2. The director testified that this audit was conducted because Region 2 was being considered as a model.
Complainant indicates that from 2005 through March 27, 2008, she received performance appraisals of Exceeds Expectations. In October 2008, however she received a lower rating of "Fully Successful." In May 2009, the LAM wrote a letter to Complainant's then supervisor (S1A) indicating that Complainant's performance should improve or Complainant should be replaced. SIA did not share this information with Complainant. Complainant was not put on a performance improvement plan and no meeting was held with Complainant and Human Resources regarding performance concerns. In June 2009, Complainant wasreassigned to the position of "Senior Quality Assurance," which, she maintained, was essentially a data entry position. S2 indicated that Complainant was reassigned at the direction of Headquarters. Headquarters provided three reasons for the reassignment. They were: (1) ALION was threatening to sue, (2) Complainant had communication issues, and (3) she had not attended the national 2008 PO conference and meetings in June 2008 and May 2009.
Complainant alleges that she was transferred as a result of reprisal for filing her EEO complaint. She maintains that she went from managing multibillion/multimillion dollar contracts to being a data entry clerk. Complainant contends that she was known as being diligent about her work and a hard worker and this reassignment was devastating to her career and the way in which she was viewed in the office. She maintains that she was the subject of gossip and management gloated about her removal from her position. She also maintains that her coworkers were shocked that this happened to her. Complainant notes that this was not the first time that this type of thing had
happened as another female employee was also reassigned following the filing an EEO complaint.
Therefore, on June 18, 2008, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African-American), sex (female), and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when:
1. On May 13, 2008, management assigned an official from the financial audit staff to review her work processing for the ESAT Program;
2. On April 17, 2008, her work activities were micromanaged and she was treated less favorably by management than her colleagues;
3. On April 4, 2008, management yelled at her, used abusive and offensive language on the telephone and made aggressive gestures that frightened her;
4. From March 27, 2008, to May 13, 2008, she was subjected to a hostile work environment when management consistently scrutinized her work, sent her offensive and defamatory emails as well as telephone calls, and forced her to participate in unethical and unprofessional practices that would jeopardize her position; and
5. During the hearing, Complainant alleged that she was subjected to reprisal when she was reassigned to a Senior Quality Assurance worker, which was basically a data entry position.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing and the AJ held a hearing on May 27 and 28, 2010, and issued a decision on March 9, 2011. The AJ held that Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment based on sex because she did not establish that she was treated differently than similarly-situated employees. Similarly, Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of harassment based on gender because she presented insufficient evidence to suggest that that the conduct complained of was connected in any way to her sex.
The AJ also found that Complainant failed to show that she was subjected to discrimination based on race. Specifically, the AJ found that assuming arguendo that Complainant established a prima facie case of race discrimination, the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions, namely that it was reasonable for a supervisor to become involved in a contract where legal action was threatened, there was no evidence of differential treatment between performance award recipients, and Complainant failed to show that the alleged name calling was motivated by race. The A3 found that the fact that Si was cold toward Complainant was insufficient to support an inference of racial discrimination. The A] found that Complainant did not provide sufficient evidence to show that the Agency's articulated reasons were pretext for discrimination. Similarly, the A3 found that Complainant did not present evidence to prove by a preponderance of evidence that the alleged harassment was due to her race as she had failed to show that she was subjected to discrimination based on race.
The AJ also found that Complainant failed to establish a causal connection between her EEO activity and the May 13, 2008 audit, the April 17, 2008, micro-managing and less favorable treatment, the April 4, 2008 yelling and related behavior, and the hostile work environment claim from March 27 to May 13, 2008. The Ai noted that
these allegations occurred before the Agency was aware of Complainant's protected activity. However with respect to the transfer, the Al found that Complainant had been subjected to an adverse employment action when she was transferred from her position as a GS-13 PO to the position of a GS-13 Senior Quality Assurance. The A.1 noted that Complainant went from managing multibillion/multimillion dollar contracts to a data entry position after she filed an EEO complaint. And, even though the pay remained constant it was a "disadvantageous transfer" and was reasonably likely to deter employees from engaging in protected activity.
In response, the Agency indicated that Complainant was transferred due to her lack of sufficient technical expertise; inability or unwillingness to retain CO guidance; inability to provide clear and timely responses; unwillingness to work collaboratively; inability to consistently act professionally; and inability to avoid actions which created
the appearance of an improper personal services relationship. S I testified that Complainant was removed at the request of Headquarters due to communication
difficulties and because ALION was threatening legal action. S1 A indicated that Complainant was transferred because of communication issues and Complainant's
lack of attendance at the national 2008 PO conference and meetings in June 2008 and May 2009 about the ESAT contract.
Notwithstanding, the AJ found that Complainant established by a preponderance of the evidence that the Agency's articulated nondiscriminatory reasons were pretext for discrimination based on retaliation. Among other things, it was noted that the Agency's evaluations did not reflect that the transfer was necessitated by Complainant's performance as Complainant received Exceeds Expectations and Fully Successful ratings. Complainant's performance reviews did not show any problems with her work,
including the results of the May 13, 2008, audit which uncovered no problems with Complainant's work. Further, the second audit was conducted to determine if
Complainant's Region 2 should be used as a model. The AJ found additional evidence of pretext in that the Agency never communicated any alleged performance problems with Complainant and no meeting was ever held with Complainant and Human Resources about performance concerns. Moreover, there was positive testimony from multiple coworkers and the acting Branch Chief which addressed Complainant's work ethic and the quality of her work. It was noted that she was a good worker and coworkers were surprised when she was removed from her PO position. Accordingly, the AJ found that Complainant proved that the Agency's articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons were pretext for discrimination based on retaliation.
Therefore, the AJ concluded that Complainant failed to establish a disparate treatment and harassment claim based on her sex and race. The Al also found that Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation for the May 13, 2008 audit, the April 17, 2008, micro-managing and less favorable treatment, the April 4, 2007 yelling and related behavior, or the hostile work environment from March 27 to May 13, 2008 and related claims. With respect to the June 2009 transfer, the AJ found that the Agency articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for the transfer. However, the Al then determined that Complainant met her burden to show that the
Agency's reasons were not credible and were pretext for discrimination on the basis of reprisal for Complainant's protected activity.
The AJ issued an Interim Decision on July 12, 2010, finding discrimination and instructed the parties to provide information regarding damages. The AJ also ordered EEO
training for all responsible management officials involved, and the Agency was to post a notice of nondiscrimination. On March 9, 2011, the AJ awarded Complainant $100,000 in compensatory damages for humiliation, embarrassment, loss of enjoyment of life, and emotional harm as well as for physical manifestations of that harm as described by her (anxiety, depression, chest pain, shortness of breath, insomnia, crying, swelling in the eyes and weight gain and she was prescribed the antidepressant Zoloft), her family, friends, co-workers and her doctor. The Al found that this award of nonpecuniary compensatory damages was justified by the evidence in the record and the Commissions decisions.
Using the Lodestar, the AJ found that Complainant was entitled to reasonable attorney's fees of $410 per hour. The Agency argued that the attorney should not be entitled to fees as most of Complainant's claims were unsuccessful. In response, the attorney averred that the hours spent on the unsuccessful issues were deleted from the billing invoice. Notwithstanding the AJ found that the claim of retaliation was an accepted claim from which Complainant was successful on. Further she found that the claim was like and related to the claims in evidence. As such, the AJ did not find the Agency's argument credible and The AJ also awarded attorney's fees in the amount of
$73,660.46 were reasonable appropriate and justified in this case. Costs in the amount of $871.79 were also granted as reasonable.
Thereafter, the Agency filed a motion for reconsideration regarding damages, attorney's fees, and the finding of liability against the Agency for the claim of retaliatory
removal of Complainant from her Project Officer position. The Agency argued that it was unable to develop the record on the issue of retaliation regarding Complainant's transfer because it was taken by surprise. The AJ found this argument to be untenable as this issue had been discussed during discovery, in a pretrial conference, in Complainant's submissions to the Agency on February 22, 2010, in Complainant's witness testimony prior to the hearing, in opening statements at the hearing, during the witness testimony at the hearing, and in the attorney's closing arguments. The AJ found that the Agency addressed this issue throughout the process without objection. Therefore, the AJ denied the Agency's motion for reconsideration.
The Agency subsequently issued a final order rejecting the AJ's finding that Complainant proved that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged. The Agency also objected to the compensatory damages awarded in this case.
CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL
On appeal, the Agency argues that the AJ erred when she found that the Complainant established that the June 10, 2009, lateral reassignment was based
on retaliation. The Agency argues that there is substantial evidence in the record which demonstrates that Complainant's laieral reassignment :vas based on
the performance deficiencies set forth in the case. rr1.432, LL _ Agency maintains that the supervisors' assessment of Complainant's performance should be the controlling factor in this case.
The Agency also does not concur with the AJ's award of non-pecuniary compensatory damages because it is "monstrously excessive" and is not consistent with amounts awarded in similar cases. The Agency argues that this finding is not supported by the AJ's own subsidiary findings of fact, substantial evidence in the record and
Commission precedent. The Agency argues that assuming arguendo that the AJ did not err, the damages are excessive and should be in the range of $2,000 plus.
In response, Complainant argues that the AJ's decision finding discrimination should be upheld. Complainant notes that the Agency had not implemented any of the relief ordered. Further, Complainant's counsel respectfully requests that the Commission recalculate the attorney fee award as her current Laffey_ matrix rate that had been increased to $420 per hour in January 2011.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by an AJ will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence is defined as "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board,
340 U.S. 474, 477 (1951) (citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not discriminatory intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982). An AJ's conclusions of law are subject to a de novo standard of review, whether or not a hearing was held. An AJ's credibility determination based on the demeanor of a witness or on the tone of voice of a witness will be accepted unless documents or other objective evidence so contradicts the testimony or the testimony so lacks in credibility that a reasonable fact finder would not credit it. See EEOC Management Directive 110, Chapter 9, at § VI.B. (November 9, 1999).
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
We note that the Commission has the discretion to review only those issues specifically raised in an appeal. Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, 9-10 (November 9, 1999). In the instant case the Commission finds that the Agency failed to show that the AJ erred with respect to the finding that Complainant was discriminated against on the basis of retaliation when she was transferred to a new position. The Commission finds that the AJ was correct in determining that even though the Agency articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions, i.e., that Complainant was transferred due to performance problems, the Complainant showed that those reasons were pretext for discriminatory animus as the AJ correctly found that no performance problems were ever communicated to Complainant. Also, the AJ noted that Complainant was thought of very highly by those who worked alongside her. Moreover, her performance was ranked as Exceeds Expectations and Fully Successful during this time. Accordingly, we find that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the AJ's findings here.
With regard to the Agency's contention that the award of non-pecuniary compensatory damages was excessive in this case, we again find that the Agency failed to establish that the AJ erred. The record shows that as a result of discrimination Complainant experienced humiliation, embarrassment, gossip, ridicule, as well as the physical manifestations of stress and anxiety. Complainant's damages are supported by the record through affidavit testimony from, family, friends, coworkers, and her doctor. Additionally, the award of $100,000 for these types of damages is consistent with Commission precedent as is clearly listed in the AJ's decision. Other than not wanting to pay the amount ordered, we find that the Agency has not provided a persuasive argument as to why the amount of the damages should be lowered.
Finally, Complainant's request that her attorney be paid according to the current Leffey matrix rate of $420 per hour instead of the $4l0 that was used to calculate attorney's fees. The attorney showed that her rate had been increased as of January 2011. As noted above, the AJ's award of damages took place on March 9, 2011. 2 The Commission finds that the $420 rate is the correct rate as this rate was the current rate at the time of the decision. Therefore, the Agency will be ordered to recalculate attorney's fees using the $420 amount.
CONCLUSION
The Commission has previously determined that the proper customary hourly rate is the reasonable hourly rate in effect at the time of the award, not at the time services are provided. See Mareno v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 01943104 (February 14, 1996).
Based on a thorough review of the record and the contentions on appeal, including those not specifically addressed herein, we REVERSE the Agency's Final Order which found that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination based on reprisal when she was transferred from her PO position. We find that substantial evidence supports the AJ's finding of discrimination based on reprisal with respect to the transfer.
ORDER
The agency is order to take the following remedial action:
1. Within 45 (forty-five) calendar days of the date of this decision, the Agency is ordered to pay Complainant $100,000 in nonpecuniary compensatory damages.
Within 45 (forty-five) calendar days of the date of this decision, the Agency is order to recalculate and pay attorney's fees using the $420 approved rate. The Agency is also ordered to pay costs in the amount of $871.79.
2. The Agency shall immediately take corrective action to ensure such discriminatory actions by and from its supervisors, managers, and all other staff involved in decisions affecting employment, will not recur, including providing 32 hours of mandatory training to all management involved on the rights of employees under Title VII, the obligations of management and personnel staff to insure that those rights are protected, and the possible relief (both disciplinary by the Agency and statutorily from the Commission or the courts) available to such employees against management or personnel staff who discriminate.
3. The Agency shall post the enclosed notice, pursuant to the paragraph below entitled, "Posting Order."
4. The Agency shall consider taking appropriate disciplinary action against the responsible management officials. The Commission does not consider training to be
disciplinary action. The Agency shall report its decision to the EEOC compliance officer. If the Agency decides to take disciplinary action, it shall identify the action taken. If the Agency decides not to take disciplinary action, it shall set forth the reason(s) for its decision not to impose discipline. If any of the responsible management officials have left the Agency's employ, the Agency shall provide documentation of their departure date(s).
The Agency is further directed to submit a report of compliance, as provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision." The report
shall include supporting documentation verifying that the corrective action has been implemented.
POSTING ORDER (60900)
The Agency is ordered to post at its Region 2, Headquarters facility in Edison, New Jersey copies of the attached notice. Copies of the notice, after being signed by the agency's duly authorized representative, shall be posted by the agency within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, and shall remain posted
for sixty (60) consecutive days, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. The agency shall take reasonable steps to ensure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. The original signed notice is to be submitted to the Compliance Officer at the address cited in the paragraph entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision," within ten (10) calendar days of the expiration of the posting period.
ATTORNEY'S FEES (H0610)
If Complainant has been represented by an attorney (as defined by 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(e)(1)(iii)), he/she is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees incurred in the processing of the complaint. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(e). The award of attorney's fees shall be paid by the Agency. The attorney shall submit a verified statement of fees to the Agency -not to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Office of federal Operations -- within thirty (30) calendar days of this decision becoming final. The Agency shall then process the claim for attorney's fees in accordance with 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)
Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory. The Agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of all
ordered corrective action. The report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. The Agency's report must contain supporting documentation, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant. If the Agency does not comply with the Commission's order, the Complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(a). The Complainant also has the right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(g). Alternatively, the Complainant has the right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File a Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. §§ 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying
complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0610)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this case if the Complainant or the Agency submits a written request containing arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed with the Office of Federal Operations (0F0) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. In the absence of a legible postmark, the request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include proof of service on the other party.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(c).
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0610)
This is a decision requiring the Agency to continue its administrative processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil action, you have the right to
file such action in an appropriate United States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date you filed your complaint with the Agency, or filed your appeal with the Commission. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official Agency head or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. Filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791,794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File a Civil Action").
Whistleblowers seek federal protection June 26, 2012
FinalCall.com News
By Askia Muhammad -Senior Correspondent-
Last updated: Jun 8, 2012 - 9:52:10 AM
WASHINGTON - When the subject of U.S. federal “whistleblowers” is discussed, the focus usually begins with the spectacular exploits of Daniel Ellsberg who leaked the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times in 1971, exposing that the administration of President Lyndon Johnson had “systematically lied, not only to the public, but also to Congress” about the Vietnam War. But the reality in the workplace is that most employees who expose federal waste, fraud and abuse, are women, and like Mr. Ellsberg they are often punished, not rewarded for their courage.
A handful of women, authors, and their supporters came forward again recently for a “Whistleblower Summit on Civil and Human Rights” to challenge President Barack Obama and his administration which they accuse of “WoW”—fighting a War on Whistleblowers and Women.
'I was discriminated against, sexually assaulted, retaliated, anything you can think of. They tried to run me out of there for describing the things that they’ve done, for telling on them, for whistleblowing.'—Alicia Dabney, Summit attendee
The Make It Safe Coalition, the ACORN 8, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Coalition of Minority Employees convened the summit May 21-23 to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the “No Fear Act,” which was enacted ostensibly to protect workers who come forward to expose racial discrimination and other wrongful
government practices.
“I want to pay special recognition to the whistleblowers here today that have come forward to expose wrongdoing, waste, fraud, and abuse,” Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) told the summit opening plenary. “These courageous whistleblowers have risked their careers, livelihoods, and personal well-being. I thank all whistleblowers and those who support their cause. The dean of Whistleblowers, Ernie Fitzgerald once said that the only crime whistleblowers commit is that they ‘commit truth.’ For it, they’re as welcome as a skunk at a picnic,” Sen. Grassley continued. “Today’s event highlights the uphill struggle that whistleblowers overcome. I commend each and every whistleblower that, like Ernie, fights to make sure that the truth is heard.
“I was discriminated against, sexually assaulted, retaliated, anything you can think of,” summit attendee Alicia Dabney, a Native American from the Sequoia National Forrest in northern California told The Final Call. “They tried to run me out of there for describing the things that they’ve done, for telling on them, for whistleblowing.
They’ve destroyed my life. Now, they don’t even want to allow me to go back to work. They’re letting the gentlemen who are employed, stay employed and continue to promote them while my kids are the ones suffering at home,” Ms. Dabney said, holding back tears. “They’ve just ripped away my dignity. They’ve forced me to urinate in front of them on the side of the road. They’ve spit in my face in front of everybody. They’ve just ridiculed me. I get really emotional about it. Three years now, this has been going on.”
“I’ve said it for many years, I’d like to see the president of the United States have a Rose Garden ceremony honoring whistleblowers,” Sen. Grassley said. This would send a message from the very top of the government to the bottom about the importance and value of whistleblowers. They deserve it, and we all ought to be grateful for their efforts. It would be the perfect event for the president to sign a bill like the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act.”
But Sen. Grassley’s legislation, passed by unanimous consent by the Senate in May 6, is in fact a wolf in sheep’s clothing, according to critics, because it contains a “poison pill” provision, according to Marsha Coleman-Adebayo. The bill now proceeds to the House as HR 3289. “While this legislation provides millions of federal workers with important safety protections, it strips other legal protections particularly for Title 7 complainants, such as African-Americans, women, people of color and economically disadvantaged people, of hard won rights through the Merit System Protection Board (MSPB),” Ms. Coleman-Adebayo wrote for the “Black Agenda Report."
“The No FEAR Institute, Net-We and the National Whistleblower Center have vowed to fight this betrayal of the goals of the civil rights movement through public education. These civil rights and whistleblower groups are demanding that President Obama veto the bill if the anti-civil rights provisions that would empower the MSPB to deny jury trials to victims of civil rights abuse reach his desk. The MSPB does not have an effective record of providing justice for victims of discrimination and whistleblowers, with only two percent of all victims prevailing before the Board.”
Activists participating in the summit agree that the new legislation is flawed. “The Summit is a coming together of civil rights, human rights and whistleblower community. To stand up for the justice we have not gotten with the passage 10 years ago with the Whistleblower Act. We’re here to celebrate the Whistleblower Act for 10 years, but we’re here to announce that we’re going to fight for a better bill in the House and the Senate,” Lawrence Lucas, president of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees told The Final Call. “We’ve been in this struggle a long time. Sen. Grassley today talked about the passage of that bill on practically a unanimous vote, but there are corrections that we have to make in that bill to make sure that the bill does not deny a person who wants to go to court.
“What also happened today, which is unusual, we were able to talk about the Black farmers. We were able to talk about women. Women who came from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, who I represent. Five of those women came to D.C. You could see the tears in their eyes and their pain and suffering,” Mr. Lucas continued.
“What we need to understand, that everybody in the federal government must be held accountable when they abuse the civil rights, the human rights, and the other rights of individuals. That has not been happening under this administration, I’m sorry to say.
“We worked with the Clinton administration. We worked with Dan Glickman, and they made change. And all the changes we made, under the Bush administration, slowly were eradicated. But now we have an indifferent posture at the USDA. We cannot for the sake of us understand, the one person that we elected president is allowing the abuse of women, allowing the continuing abuse of minority farmers, women farmers, and Hispanic farmers as we move toward an election. “We are not a partisan organization, but we do demand and we do expect that every individual, every employee, every farmer, if they want justice by going and asking for programs from the Department of Agriculture, they get it, and they get it speedily and fair. When an employee files a complaint that case should be processed and speedily processed, and the one thing we do not expect, and it’s happening mostly to women, whether they’re Black, White, pink or blue. The women are reprised against. They’re losing their jobs. And these five brave women came from California, a Native American came from Indiana to talk about the problems they have.”
"I’m just glad you guys invited me out here to make a stand,” Ms. Dabney said. “I guess what I’ve realized is that, once you whistleblow, you don’t have a career anymore. But you have an obligation to the others below you, the next generation, the future, my nieces, my nephews, people’s mothers, people’s sisters, daughters, anything that’s coming from this day forward. We’re literally making history. We’ve come together, everybody, whistleblowers, civil rights, Occupy EPA.”
Mr. Lucas promised his coalition would continue to press for the eradication of all forms of discrimination at the USDA, and to protect the workers who expose wrongdoing from within the government. “I think it can be done. It can be accomplished. But we have to come together as a group,” Mr. Lucas said. “We are here to say that we’re coming back. We’re going to have thousands of shoes in Washington if they don’t straighten up the mess at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. And we’ll continue to work with the whistleblower group. “The pain and suffering of women, the pain and suffering of minority farmers need to be addressed by the Congress, by the media and by this administration,” he said.
Fracking Waste Dumping on New Jersey June 26, 2012
I just took action to stand up against bringing fracking waste to New Jersey. Tell the State Senate not to let gas drillers to dump on us! I urge you to take action yourself and spread the word! To take action on this issue, click on the link below or copy and paste into browser:
http://www.webaction.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=l53zSCLzEYi8lc1AEYXizQ&id=6015
http://www.webaction.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=l53zSCLzEYi8lc1AEYXizQ&id=6015
Two Whistleblowers Prevail June 26, 2012
Summary: This Week: Two whistleblowers, Richard Convertino and Charles Scott Howard, who recently won court decisions
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/06/articles/honesty-without-fear-radio/this-week-on-honesty-without-fear/index.html
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/06/articles/honesty-without-fear-radio/this-week-on-honesty-without-fear/index.html
MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD LACKS INTEGRITY June 20, 2012
From: Tanya Ward Jordan <ward.tj7@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:36 PM
(Part 1) MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD LACKS INTEGRITY (Part 1) See Video -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?edit=vd&v=7wVtp2i-vpM
MSPB continually fails to fairly and impartially adjudicate employee appeals.
Date: Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:36 PM
(Part 1) MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD LACKS INTEGRITY (Part 1) See Video -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?edit=vd&v=7wVtp2i-vpM
MSPB continually fails to fairly and impartially adjudicate employee appeals.
PHS whistleblower protections are being decided now!
National Whistleblower Center, Washington, DC
June 18, 2012: House and Senate leaders are in "conference" RIGHT NOW debating whether or not employees in the Public Health Service (PHS) will obtain whistleblower protections. At stake is whether or not thousands of PHS employees who work at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be protected if they blow the whistle on waste, fraud or safety violations.
TAKE ACTION! Tell Congress that PHS employees must have the same protections against retaliation as their colleagues who work at HHS/FDA!
The House-Senate Conference debating the FDA Reform Act (S.3187 / H.R. 5651) will decide the fate of PHS whistleblowers over the next 24-48 hours. Your immediate support for PHS whistleblowers is needed RIGHT NOW.
Congress is deciding whether an outrageous loophole in federal law that permits government bureaucrats to fire PHS employee who blow the whistle, will be closed. Currently, there is no protection for PHS whistleblowers. If they report the waste of taxpayer money or "bad science" being used to justify major public health decisions, they can be fired with no recourse!
This weekend whistleblower advocates, with strong support among many Members of Congress, proposed a legislative fix for this unjustifiable and dangerous loophole. The fix would simply provide PHS employees with the same protection all other workers at HHS/FDA have. It gives them the right to lawfully blow the whistle, have an independent investigation conducted by the Office of Special Counsel into any retaliation, and a hearing on the merits of their case. Simple due process.
TAKE ACTION! Tell Congress to protect PHS whistleblowers!
However, there is strong resistance in the conference to approving this essential fix. The key decision maker is Congressman Fred Upton (R MI-6), Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Please email your Senator and Congressman to request that they contact Representative Upton to obtain his pledge in support of protecting PHS whistleblowers when they vote in the House-Senate conference.
Please call Representative Upton and ask him to ensure that PHS whistleblowers have the same rights as other HHS and FDA employees with whom they work side-by-side. His number is: (202) 225-2927.
TAKE ACTION NOW! The fate of PHS whistleblowers will decided over the next 24-48 hours!
June 18, 2012: House and Senate leaders are in "conference" RIGHT NOW debating whether or not employees in the Public Health Service (PHS) will obtain whistleblower protections. At stake is whether or not thousands of PHS employees who work at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be protected if they blow the whistle on waste, fraud or safety violations.
TAKE ACTION! Tell Congress that PHS employees must have the same protections against retaliation as their colleagues who work at HHS/FDA!
The House-Senate Conference debating the FDA Reform Act (S.3187 / H.R. 5651) will decide the fate of PHS whistleblowers over the next 24-48 hours. Your immediate support for PHS whistleblowers is needed RIGHT NOW.
Congress is deciding whether an outrageous loophole in federal law that permits government bureaucrats to fire PHS employee who blow the whistle, will be closed. Currently, there is no protection for PHS whistleblowers. If they report the waste of taxpayer money or "bad science" being used to justify major public health decisions, they can be fired with no recourse!
This weekend whistleblower advocates, with strong support among many Members of Congress, proposed a legislative fix for this unjustifiable and dangerous loophole. The fix would simply provide PHS employees with the same protection all other workers at HHS/FDA have. It gives them the right to lawfully blow the whistle, have an independent investigation conducted by the Office of Special Counsel into any retaliation, and a hearing on the merits of their case. Simple due process.
TAKE ACTION! Tell Congress to protect PHS whistleblowers!
However, there is strong resistance in the conference to approving this essential fix. The key decision maker is Congressman Fred Upton (R MI-6), Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Please email your Senator and Congressman to request that they contact Representative Upton to obtain his pledge in support of protecting PHS whistleblowers when they vote in the House-Senate conference.
Please call Representative Upton and ask him to ensure that PHS whistleblowers have the same rights as other HHS and FDA employees with whom they work side-by-side. His number is: (202) 225-2927.
TAKE ACTION NOW! The fate of PHS whistleblowers will decided over the next 24-48 hours!
Political Corruption taken to New Heights in Washington, D.C.
"One hand washes the other," but they can't wash away the dirt of compromising and diminishing our American principles, values, and rights. Until I came to Washington, D.C., just before the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, I was just an everyday taxpayer, unaware of the total corruption that takes place in this town where Judges and lawyers abound, helping each other out; contractors sit outside buildings to suck out the taxpayers' money; our dollars flow out in the billlions of dollars; and Federal agency officials and personnel take advantage of the systems. Employees, who are whistleblowers, civil rights complainants and grievants, don't stand a chance in this politically corrupt environment because no one wants their dirty hands and laundry aired to the public, particularly in today's climate with an election in the balance.
The General Services Administration (GSA) is just one example of what occurs when agencies have too much money and too little integrity or knowledge of how the Federal government works. GSA officials are not the only culprits using conferences and travel as family vacations. During and after the GSA scandal, many employees were told to cut back on conferences and curb their travel. Las Vegas and Atlantic City were always questionable conference venues because it raised the glamor and gambling image. It was better to pick a place just outside these areas to conduct a conference or house the attendees and participants. Unfortunately for taxpayers, another scandal willl take the place and it will be business as usual.
I question why this administration has the image of squandering taxpayer money when we can ill afford it, retaliating against whistleblowers, and using their political clout to go against those who try to expose the corruption? Those of us who have worked in both the private and public sectors know that the major difference between the two is that industry employers expect their employees to earn their keep and contribute to the productivity and earning power of the company, while the public sector is expected to use the enormous amount of money they are given in any way they can within a specific timeframe, without any concern for adding value. As a civilian with the military, I learned that there was no end of the benefits derived from having unlimited funds at your disposal to be spent annually. I also learned that if it were necessary, you had to be prepared to work 24-7, with soldiers and civilians taught discipline, organization and productivity.
At the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with a budget of about $8 billion dollars, I found employees sleeping on the job, shopping on government time, playing computer games, and officials engaging in nepotism, cronyism, favoritism, sexism, racism, and retaliation. The non-use of the merit system and prohibited personnel practices were extounding in such a small (17,800 employees) agency. For two decades, EPA has been unable to get its civil rights program in order because they continue to use the office as a "dumping ground" for employees who have no experience or background in civil rights. This lack of knowledge starts at the top of the organization, so that any experts or professionals are destroyed at the first opportunity with the blessing of the administration. The Holland & Knight Report issued 10 years ago outlined all of the many problems within the office. Instead of putting a seasoned civil rights professional in the office who had the capability to take corrective action, another non-EEO person was put in the Director's position to lead the program out of their problems. Instead, a decade later, a new report was issued by Deloitte Consultants (at a cost of $350,000) to say that the past decade was a disaster, so that complaints were not processed timely.
The General Services Administration (GSA) is just one example of what occurs when agencies have too much money and too little integrity or knowledge of how the Federal government works. GSA officials are not the only culprits using conferences and travel as family vacations. During and after the GSA scandal, many employees were told to cut back on conferences and curb their travel. Las Vegas and Atlantic City were always questionable conference venues because it raised the glamor and gambling image. It was better to pick a place just outside these areas to conduct a conference or house the attendees and participants. Unfortunately for taxpayers, another scandal willl take the place and it will be business as usual.
I question why this administration has the image of squandering taxpayer money when we can ill afford it, retaliating against whistleblowers, and using their political clout to go against those who try to expose the corruption? Those of us who have worked in both the private and public sectors know that the major difference between the two is that industry employers expect their employees to earn their keep and contribute to the productivity and earning power of the company, while the public sector is expected to use the enormous amount of money they are given in any way they can within a specific timeframe, without any concern for adding value. As a civilian with the military, I learned that there was no end of the benefits derived from having unlimited funds at your disposal to be spent annually. I also learned that if it were necessary, you had to be prepared to work 24-7, with soldiers and civilians taught discipline, organization and productivity.
At the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with a budget of about $8 billion dollars, I found employees sleeping on the job, shopping on government time, playing computer games, and officials engaging in nepotism, cronyism, favoritism, sexism, racism, and retaliation. The non-use of the merit system and prohibited personnel practices were extounding in such a small (17,800 employees) agency. For two decades, EPA has been unable to get its civil rights program in order because they continue to use the office as a "dumping ground" for employees who have no experience or background in civil rights. This lack of knowledge starts at the top of the organization, so that any experts or professionals are destroyed at the first opportunity with the blessing of the administration. The Holland & Knight Report issued 10 years ago outlined all of the many problems within the office. Instead of putting a seasoned civil rights professional in the office who had the capability to take corrective action, another non-EEO person was put in the Director's position to lead the program out of their problems. Instead, a decade later, a new report was issued by Deloitte Consultants (at a cost of $350,000) to say that the past decade was a disaster, so that complaints were not processed timely.
Whistleblowers, Beware: Most Claims End in Disappointment, Despair Posted: 06/04/2012 4:15 pm
This article deals with whistleblowing against corporate corruption and government contracting but is also the reality when filing EEO complaints.
Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/04/whistleblower-law-false-claims-act-awards-james-holzrichter_n_1563783.html
Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/04/whistleblower-law-false-claims-act-awards-james-holzrichter_n_1563783.html
National Whistleblowers Center
Summary: The U.S. Department of Labor, Administrative Review Board (ARB) issued a precedent setting decision last week holding that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) does protect the employees of contractors to publicly traded companies. The decision is particularly noteworthy as the...
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/06/articles/corporate-1/arb-says-sox-covers-contractors-employees-rejects-lawson/index.html
Summary: On May 22, 2012, the No FEAR Coalition honored three whistleblowers and our own Richard Renner, who serves as the Legal Director and Secretary of the National Whistleblowers Center. The award for Renner recognized his advocacy for whistleblowers and his...
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/06/articles/images/no-fear-award-receivers-include-richard-renner/index.html
Summary: The U.S. Department of Labor, Administrative Review Board (ARB) issued a precedent setting decision last week holding that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) does protect the employees of contractors to publicly traded companies. The decision is particularly noteworthy as the...
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/06/articles/corporate-1/arb-says-sox-covers-contractors-employees-rejects-lawson/index.html
Summary: On May 22, 2012, the No FEAR Coalition honored three whistleblowers and our own Richard Renner, who serves as the Legal Director and Secretary of the National Whistleblowers Center. The award for Renner recognized his advocacy for whistleblowers and his...
View the entire entry: http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2012/06/articles/images/no-fear-award-receivers-include-richard-renner/index.html
I've Been Worried as an American - Have You? May 31, 2012
One afternoon I decided to get my nails done at the local salon. Two young women were sitting next to me, one getting her nails done, her friend just chatting with her. Their conversation turned to work and the horrible environment that they were working under. One said, "I don't know what is happening, but my office is terrible and we are treated so poorly as women." The other replied, "For whatever reason, we weren't treated this badly under the Republicans. I expected better treatment as a Democrat, but it's really much worse. I never thought this would be the case." For a long time I considered the conversation of these young women working in the Federal government. I was bothered by the conversation because I found myself in a similar position.
After working in the Federal government for many years during various administrations, I don't think I ever received such callous or disrespectful treatment as a woman and a professional. Was this coming from the top as a part of the Obama administration? At first I wasn't sure, but as time went on I was convinced that it started under President Obama's leadership. He is really quite intelligent with a gift of public speaking and convincing others that he is sincere in whatever position he is expounding, similar to Bill Clinton. What has always troubled me is his continuous actions and positions actually diminish our rights as Americans and he doesn't walk the constant talk. The President appears to speak for the underdog, the working class, the homosexual community, the veterans, the women, the children, the voters, the farmers, the students, the foreclosed and the forgotten. I told my husband that he would be coming to our house soon for our two votes. I doubt that he has left anyone out in his pursuit of winning a second term as the President. He does not want to be a "one-termer" going down in history as the first black President who did not fulfill his promises for "Change." Of course, we assumed that he meant change for the better, not worse, which has been the case.
I wrote to the President when he came into office because he said he wanted to hear from us, the citizens of this great country. My recommendation was simple - put Americans back to work first by instituting jobs programs similar to the "Comprehensive Employment & Training Administration (CETA)," the "Young Adult Conservation Corps," and the "Youth Conservation Corps (YCC)," then go on to other important things. My mentor, a man out of the civil rights movement, told me years ago that once the unemployment rate reached 6% or more, lower- and middle-class white males were out of work, so a jobs program was necessary. Otherwise, you were only dealing with those people who are and continue to be at the bottom of our society - the disenfranchised. Since I had been involved in starting up and implementing those former jobs programs, I offered to work on instituting whatever program the administration came up with to put people back to work, which could include the under 6%, where there are many women and children living in poverty. After all, this was the first African-American President, so he would certainly enlarge a program to include the seriously disadvantaged, underemployed and unemployed. But, it didn't happen. Instead, he continued on the path of the Clintons to push through a health care program with millions of Americans losing their homes, cars, educations, and way of life. There is no question that our health care system needs to be fixed because it is broken, but first things should come first. What came first for me was worry and fear of losing what our country stands for and our values.
The military budget is enormous when you include Bush's Department of Homeland Security, the Veteran's Administration, the Department of Defense, CIA, FBI, and who really knows what else. A recent article I read noted that the budget talks are not including the military budget, but instead the Good Ole' Boys (GOBs) are continuing to put their emphasis on Social Security, Medicare, and Education, et al, for budget cuts. The military machine outside the "Warrior Departments" is enormous as contractors suck out whatever money goes in from the taxpayers. I consider President Obama a Good Ole' Boy as he gives to and is supported by the rich, entertains the wealthy and movie stars, plays and watches basketball, football and all the boys' sports, and plays the GOB game to the hilt. This is while the highly intelligent First Lady gardens and runs around with the children, staying in the background. They learned this lesson from the Clinton's also - Hillary was too involved, too vocal, too out there. As a First Lady in the United States, you are required to appear "lady-like" and do good works, not engage in anything controversial or serious, such as health care.
Under an Executive Order, President Obama charged Federal agencies with putting in place a "Council on Women & Girls" with appropriate programs for their inclusion. Yet, the number of women harassed, retailated against and abused during this administration is horrendous. Whistleblowers, complainants, and the aggrieved in the Federal government have never been treated worse than under this President and no amount of protests, filing of complaints, or writing campaigns have made any difference. What women and girls is he talking about or don't certain women and girls count? His political appointees have taken his lead because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with a woman in command, has a dysmal record in their treatment of women and minorities and the Department of Agriculture is even worse. Read the letter below from an American Indian woman in OUR Forest Service that has been ignored.
I'm terribly worried as an American because the tragedy of the World Trade Center bombing has allowed the powerful in this country to take away many of our rights and pile on more restrictions to our freedom. We are already overtaxed wherever we go or whatever we do - property taxes, sales tax, highway tolls, speeding tickets, parking meters and tickets, television cable rip-offs, cell phone overcharges, banking charges, baggage costs, strip searches, hidden cameras and fines, security lists, and now drones. Keeping middle-class Americans in front of their television sets watching nonsense or using fear tactics while their rights are stripped away slowly but surely is now the real American dream of the rich. And, I am finally in line with those two young women who said that things are much worse under this administration. I even feel that writing this article in the United States of America puts me in harms way. Sad.
After working in the Federal government for many years during various administrations, I don't think I ever received such callous or disrespectful treatment as a woman and a professional. Was this coming from the top as a part of the Obama administration? At first I wasn't sure, but as time went on I was convinced that it started under President Obama's leadership. He is really quite intelligent with a gift of public speaking and convincing others that he is sincere in whatever position he is expounding, similar to Bill Clinton. What has always troubled me is his continuous actions and positions actually diminish our rights as Americans and he doesn't walk the constant talk. The President appears to speak for the underdog, the working class, the homosexual community, the veterans, the women, the children, the voters, the farmers, the students, the foreclosed and the forgotten. I told my husband that he would be coming to our house soon for our two votes. I doubt that he has left anyone out in his pursuit of winning a second term as the President. He does not want to be a "one-termer" going down in history as the first black President who did not fulfill his promises for "Change." Of course, we assumed that he meant change for the better, not worse, which has been the case.
I wrote to the President when he came into office because he said he wanted to hear from us, the citizens of this great country. My recommendation was simple - put Americans back to work first by instituting jobs programs similar to the "Comprehensive Employment & Training Administration (CETA)," the "Young Adult Conservation Corps," and the "Youth Conservation Corps (YCC)," then go on to other important things. My mentor, a man out of the civil rights movement, told me years ago that once the unemployment rate reached 6% or more, lower- and middle-class white males were out of work, so a jobs program was necessary. Otherwise, you were only dealing with those people who are and continue to be at the bottom of our society - the disenfranchised. Since I had been involved in starting up and implementing those former jobs programs, I offered to work on instituting whatever program the administration came up with to put people back to work, which could include the under 6%, where there are many women and children living in poverty. After all, this was the first African-American President, so he would certainly enlarge a program to include the seriously disadvantaged, underemployed and unemployed. But, it didn't happen. Instead, he continued on the path of the Clintons to push through a health care program with millions of Americans losing their homes, cars, educations, and way of life. There is no question that our health care system needs to be fixed because it is broken, but first things should come first. What came first for me was worry and fear of losing what our country stands for and our values.
The military budget is enormous when you include Bush's Department of Homeland Security, the Veteran's Administration, the Department of Defense, CIA, FBI, and who really knows what else. A recent article I read noted that the budget talks are not including the military budget, but instead the Good Ole' Boys (GOBs) are continuing to put their emphasis on Social Security, Medicare, and Education, et al, for budget cuts. The military machine outside the "Warrior Departments" is enormous as contractors suck out whatever money goes in from the taxpayers. I consider President Obama a Good Ole' Boy as he gives to and is supported by the rich, entertains the wealthy and movie stars, plays and watches basketball, football and all the boys' sports, and plays the GOB game to the hilt. This is while the highly intelligent First Lady gardens and runs around with the children, staying in the background. They learned this lesson from the Clinton's also - Hillary was too involved, too vocal, too out there. As a First Lady in the United States, you are required to appear "lady-like" and do good works, not engage in anything controversial or serious, such as health care.
Under an Executive Order, President Obama charged Federal agencies with putting in place a "Council on Women & Girls" with appropriate programs for their inclusion. Yet, the number of women harassed, retailated against and abused during this administration is horrendous. Whistleblowers, complainants, and the aggrieved in the Federal government have never been treated worse than under this President and no amount of protests, filing of complaints, or writing campaigns have made any difference. What women and girls is he talking about or don't certain women and girls count? His political appointees have taken his lead because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with a woman in command, has a dysmal record in their treatment of women and minorities and the Department of Agriculture is even worse. Read the letter below from an American Indian woman in OUR Forest Service that has been ignored.
I'm terribly worried as an American because the tragedy of the World Trade Center bombing has allowed the powerful in this country to take away many of our rights and pile on more restrictions to our freedom. We are already overtaxed wherever we go or whatever we do - property taxes, sales tax, highway tolls, speeding tickets, parking meters and tickets, television cable rip-offs, cell phone overcharges, banking charges, baggage costs, strip searches, hidden cameras and fines, security lists, and now drones. Keeping middle-class Americans in front of their television sets watching nonsense or using fear tactics while their rights are stripped away slowly but surely is now the real American dream of the rich. And, I am finally in line with those two young women who said that things are much worse under this administration. I even feel that writing this article in the United States of America puts me in harms way. Sad.
What if this Were Your Mother, Daughter, or Sister? May 31, 2012
Following is a letter written, along with many others, by a young mother who works for OUR government in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, who has been seriously abused, emotionally and physically. She and other women who work for the Department of Agriculture came to Washington, DC on two occasions to ask the Obama Administration and Secretary Tom Vilsack to hear their pleas and fix the serious problems. After you read her letter, please ask yourself what is wrong with our government and officials who would allow this type of sexual harassment, allow the victim to be put on administrative leave paid for by the taxpayers, and let the perpetrators to get off without being fired. I'm personally incensed and I hope you will join me in getting some justice for this women and others in the Forest Service and the U.S. military who have to work under conditions of abuse and fear on a daily basis because they are women. (NOTE: The General Schedule pay scale in the Federal government is from GS-1 through GS-15 with 10 steps in each grade; therefore, Alicia Dabney is in a lower-grade technician position with pay starting at $24,518 and ending at $31,871 based on the step. Also, I was privileged to meet Ms. Dabney, who is an articulate, beautiful and caring woman.)
From: Alicia Dabney featherhvn@yahoo.com
Date: May 25, 2012 7:30:01 PM CDT
To: Lesa Donnelly lesa@snowcrest.net
Subject: Please Help
I, Alicia Dabney, am a female Native American employee of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Sequoia National Forest located in Porterville, CA. My duty station is the Springville Work Center in Springville, CA. My job is a GS-462-4 Forestry Technician (Firefighter) from February 2010 to present. I am writing you today to request a meeting with you again to resolve the massive violations of employee civil rights, put down his War On Women, and meet with us. We need your help. My managers and supervisor have retaliated against me for reporting sexual harassment, sexual assault, discrimination against women and minorities. I will take the time to personally tell you what has happened to me and my family. So if you haven't been informed, you are now!!!
I was denied any type of training for two years--my supervisor letting me know that I didn't deserve the training. I was told by my supervisor every day, "don't talk to me
because it's not 8:00 yet" and that he gets paid to put up with me. When I requested new fire pants I was told I was too fat and needed to lose weight if my pants didn't fit. I was forced to monthly report when I was menstruating to my supervisor and I would cover my face and cry due to the humiliation and my dignity being stripped from me. As we would serve the community fighting fires or just complete physical training I was called very disgusting names!! They would make racial slurs at my Native American children. On the way to a fire assignment in New Mexico the hot shot crew purposely passed any and all restrooms and forced me to urinate on the side of the road as 20 men watched, again making me cry and stripping any dignity left in my body. I was also assaulted by a co-worker at work. When I was kneeling down getting into my fire
pack this individual came up and sat on my head. Pressing his groin into my neck and head, he refused to let me up, holding me down as I begged and cried please stop! please get off! While he and the other men laughed at me.
The men from the Hot Shot crew wrote WH*RE on the ice machine, directing it at me since I'm the only female out of 100 men. Then in another effort of trying to humiliate me they made fliers saying Alicia Dabney the WH*RE and throwing them all over my Engine Bay. On an a fire assignment in Texas my supervisor spit directly in my face in front of everyone on the assignment--they all witnessed it and I reported it. The same supervisor put me in a choke hold and slammed me down, trying to sexually assault me. I begged and cried for him to stop and not do this to me. When he released me I ran and reported it to upper management. Then another co-worker on the same assignment tried to break into my room so I called the Captain who had to physically come and stop this individual from breaking down my door.
Now my forest Supervisor has placed me on administrative leave while the men who have assaulted me continue to work. So I ask why am I being punished for speaking the truth about these violation of my human & civil rights? I need to let you know that I feel threatened and am fearing for my safety. I'm asking for your help.
So now I will take this time to pray for us:
Grandfather please come into these people's hearts and help them have the courage to help us women
who are suffering day in and day out.
Respectfully, Alicia Dabney
Please help me for I now fear for my life!!!
From: Alicia Dabney featherhvn@yahoo.com
Date: May 25, 2012 7:30:01 PM CDT
To: Lesa Donnelly lesa@snowcrest.net
Subject: Please Help
I, Alicia Dabney, am a female Native American employee of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Sequoia National Forest located in Porterville, CA. My duty station is the Springville Work Center in Springville, CA. My job is a GS-462-4 Forestry Technician (Firefighter) from February 2010 to present. I am writing you today to request a meeting with you again to resolve the massive violations of employee civil rights, put down his War On Women, and meet with us. We need your help. My managers and supervisor have retaliated against me for reporting sexual harassment, sexual assault, discrimination against women and minorities. I will take the time to personally tell you what has happened to me and my family. So if you haven't been informed, you are now!!!
I was denied any type of training for two years--my supervisor letting me know that I didn't deserve the training. I was told by my supervisor every day, "don't talk to me
because it's not 8:00 yet" and that he gets paid to put up with me. When I requested new fire pants I was told I was too fat and needed to lose weight if my pants didn't fit. I was forced to monthly report when I was menstruating to my supervisor and I would cover my face and cry due to the humiliation and my dignity being stripped from me. As we would serve the community fighting fires or just complete physical training I was called very disgusting names!! They would make racial slurs at my Native American children. On the way to a fire assignment in New Mexico the hot shot crew purposely passed any and all restrooms and forced me to urinate on the side of the road as 20 men watched, again making me cry and stripping any dignity left in my body. I was also assaulted by a co-worker at work. When I was kneeling down getting into my fire
pack this individual came up and sat on my head. Pressing his groin into my neck and head, he refused to let me up, holding me down as I begged and cried please stop! please get off! While he and the other men laughed at me.
The men from the Hot Shot crew wrote WH*RE on the ice machine, directing it at me since I'm the only female out of 100 men. Then in another effort of trying to humiliate me they made fliers saying Alicia Dabney the WH*RE and throwing them all over my Engine Bay. On an a fire assignment in Texas my supervisor spit directly in my face in front of everyone on the assignment--they all witnessed it and I reported it. The same supervisor put me in a choke hold and slammed me down, trying to sexually assault me. I begged and cried for him to stop and not do this to me. When he released me I ran and reported it to upper management. Then another co-worker on the same assignment tried to break into my room so I called the Captain who had to physically come and stop this individual from breaking down my door.
Now my forest Supervisor has placed me on administrative leave while the men who have assaulted me continue to work. So I ask why am I being punished for speaking the truth about these violation of my human & civil rights? I need to let you know that I feel threatened and am fearing for my safety. I'm asking for your help.
So now I will take this time to pray for us:
Grandfather please come into these people's hearts and help them have the courage to help us women
who are suffering day in and day out.
Respectfully, Alicia Dabney
Please help me for I now fear for my life!!!
Agencies Receive "F" on their No Fear Report Cards May 24, 2012
Yesterday, whistleblowers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Justice, and U.S. Health & Human Services joined together to protest the government's retaliation against whistleblowers and civil rights complainants, particularly during this administration. DOJ and Commerce received "F's" on their reports cards and the EPA spokesperson, Susan Morris, a long-term civil rights leader, said that EPA didn't even deserve an "F." Charts showing the reasons for the failing grades were shown to participants at the protest on the National Mall at the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial, which included doubling of processing times for complaints, significant increases in complaints filed by employees, and errors in the reports. The spokesperson who spoke about the Department of Justice's horrendous report card said, "the Department should have been put on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), which is often used against nonperforming employees, but their civil rights record is too poor for that, so they are getting an "F." He continued, "If you can't get justice at the Department of Justice, where in the world can you get it?"
Rumors Prove False: Unfortunately, as some rumors prove false, there was a rumor that Rafael DeLeon was finally OUT as the Director of Civil Civil Rights at EPA. We thought that maybe the Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, had finally come to her senses and taken some positive action about the mess she has on her hands with three complaints in District Court, findings of retaliation against Whistleblowers, and protests against her leadership and the agency.
Dr. Cate Jenskins: Dr. Cate Jenkins filed a retaliation complaint against EPA in 1992 after she had written a 1990 paper to the EPA Science Advisory Board that there was misinformation contained in the Monsanto study (Monsanto Chemical Corporation, the largest producer of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War). Shortly thereafter, the Chief of her office issued a memo stating that Jenskins, "should not be involved with anything that puts her in direct contact with the regulated community or the public," and that she should be put in another (administrative or staff) position, as was done to another EPA Whistleblower. The usual destructive path of retaliation against Whistleblowers at EPA then took place. Her work was reduced (or removed), Monsanto was apologized to for Dr. Jenkins' statements against them, a new position was created for her, and she was relocated so that she was removed from any of her prior duties involving hazardous waste and contacts with the public and industry. The finding against the EPA was that they isolated the Dr. Jenkins, did not present a legistimate nondiscriminatory reason for the assignment, and the "reorganization" did not support her relocation. The relief granted in the Order was to reinstate her, prohibit EPA from any further adverse actions against her (except for good cause), pay attorney's fees and costs, post the decision on all EPA job sites, and "in view of the flagrant disregard of this employees rights, it is considered that exemplary damages in the sum of $10,000 is justified." The Order was signed by the Administrative Law Judge Glenn Lawrence for the Department of Labor.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo: Dr. Coleman-Adebayo had a similar situation because EPA tends to repeat itself over and over. She was sent on a mission to South Africa and subsequently exposed the contamination and exposure of workers and their families to vanadium from the mining. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's recent book, "No FEAR, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA," outlines her trials and tribulations that included death threats and other unsavory actions against her. The jury's verdict was that EPA retaliated against her and awarded her full relief along with $600,000 in compensatory damages (reduced to $300,000 based on the law). Thereafter, she led the charge to assist other whistleblowers by mobilizing and supporting the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress. But, EPA just doesn't know when to quit either because the same people remain there year after year getting their big Federal salaries to defend what they want to do and how they want to do it - which does not include hearing bad news from whistleblowers and EEO complainants. Their track record for processing complaints from employees and community groups is abysmal so that they spend more taxpayer money for consultants instead of fixing the problems. This site outlines many of the more recent problems including the Administrator's appointment of Rafael DeLeon as the Director of Civil Rights after the decade-long nonperformance and problems of the previous Director, Karen Higginbotham.
Susan M. Morris: After working years as a highly-successful civil rights professional in four major federal Executive Departments, Ms. Morris transferred into EPA hoping to make it a model EEO program. Instead, she found herself surrounded by incompetence, shirkers, slackers, shoppers and sleepers. Internally, she raised her objections and frustration with employees playing computer games, sleeping in their cubicles, shopping on government time, spreading lies and gossiping, threatening employees, name-calling, and violating employees' rights by not using the merit system for promotions and hiring, management hiring their own children into the summer intern program instead of needy children in the area, hiring their friends and engaging in nepotism, and violating the personnel and civil rights laws and regulations. Finally, after the EPA had not filed three years of reports required for Congress on civil rights within the EPA and the EPA Office of Inspector General took no actions regarding the prohibited personnel practices or violations, she reported her concerns to the EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson and management officials. As an EPA Whistleblower, the usual system came into play. She was isolated, accused of various infractions (never performance related), falsely written about in an OIG report as having a personal problem that did not exist, threatened by one of the "Good Ole' Boys," discredited and endured character assassination. Finally, her work was reduced and removed, she was transferred to a nonexistent position, accused of "insubordination," and removed. The Office of Special Counsel, under the new Special Counsel Lerner, wrote to the EPA Administrator in September 2010 stating that the agency retaliated against Ms. Morris for whistleblowing, she should be returned to the agency and receive other relief. Instead, EPA decided to again go for broke and hang stupid. Morris is currently in District Court and awaiting the next step of OSC on her behalf.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo Again: No one can ever say that EPA learns from their mistakes. They just don't get it. Rafael DeLeon, the current Director of Civil Rights and his mentor, Ray Spears, decided to go after Dr. Coleman-Adebayo again. They used the civil rights system itself to transfer her out of her position to a position under their authority. At first, she only reported to Ray Spears, but when his protege DeLeon got in trouble and was removed for violations as the Director of Human Resources, he had him transferred so that he was now Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's first line supervisor and Mr. Spears the second line. Together, they engaged the assistance of Mr. Spears' other protege, Karen Higginbotham, and her subordinate, William Haig, to remove her again from federal service. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo is again before District Court.
Dr. Cate Jenkins Again: As kids we would say, "Repeat and Repeat are out in a boat, Repeat fell off and who was left?" Of course, the answer was "Repeat," so we repeated the same thing over and over. EPA is a prime example of repeat and repeat. Dr. Cate Jenkins was just reinstated as published in all of the newspapers across the country. The New York Times reported on May 8, 2012 that "E.P.A. Chemist Who Warned of Ground Zero Dust is Reinstated." The article continues by stating that Dr. Jenkins "was removed from her job in retaliation for accusing the agency of underestimating the toxicity of dust at ground zero." Dr. Jenkins sued under the Whistleblower Protection Act stating that she was retaliated against for exposing the fact that the data being relied on with respect to the World Trade Center Ground Zero cleanup was being mismeasured. She was then accused of having similar "female problems" that Dr. Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris suffered from by EPA management. A list of them includes: insubordination; discourteous, unprofessional and bullying conduct toward colleagues; threatening or disparaging remarks about supervisors; violations of time and attendance or refusing to come to work; to name just a few. These behaviors resulted in isolation, removal of work, transfers, created or non-positions, suspensions, and eventually removal. It was never about the fine work accomplished by these senior women - it was all about the politics.
More later.........
Rumors Prove False: Unfortunately, as some rumors prove false, there was a rumor that Rafael DeLeon was finally OUT as the Director of Civil Civil Rights at EPA. We thought that maybe the Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, had finally come to her senses and taken some positive action about the mess she has on her hands with three complaints in District Court, findings of retaliation against Whistleblowers, and protests against her leadership and the agency.
Dr. Cate Jenskins: Dr. Cate Jenkins filed a retaliation complaint against EPA in 1992 after she had written a 1990 paper to the EPA Science Advisory Board that there was misinformation contained in the Monsanto study (Monsanto Chemical Corporation, the largest producer of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War). Shortly thereafter, the Chief of her office issued a memo stating that Jenskins, "should not be involved with anything that puts her in direct contact with the regulated community or the public," and that she should be put in another (administrative or staff) position, as was done to another EPA Whistleblower. The usual destructive path of retaliation against Whistleblowers at EPA then took place. Her work was reduced (or removed), Monsanto was apologized to for Dr. Jenkins' statements against them, a new position was created for her, and she was relocated so that she was removed from any of her prior duties involving hazardous waste and contacts with the public and industry. The finding against the EPA was that they isolated the Dr. Jenkins, did not present a legistimate nondiscriminatory reason for the assignment, and the "reorganization" did not support her relocation. The relief granted in the Order was to reinstate her, prohibit EPA from any further adverse actions against her (except for good cause), pay attorney's fees and costs, post the decision on all EPA job sites, and "in view of the flagrant disregard of this employees rights, it is considered that exemplary damages in the sum of $10,000 is justified." The Order was signed by the Administrative Law Judge Glenn Lawrence for the Department of Labor.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo: Dr. Coleman-Adebayo had a similar situation because EPA tends to repeat itself over and over. She was sent on a mission to South Africa and subsequently exposed the contamination and exposure of workers and their families to vanadium from the mining. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's recent book, "No FEAR, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA," outlines her trials and tribulations that included death threats and other unsavory actions against her. The jury's verdict was that EPA retaliated against her and awarded her full relief along with $600,000 in compensatory damages (reduced to $300,000 based on the law). Thereafter, she led the charge to assist other whistleblowers by mobilizing and supporting the passage of the 2002 No FEAR Act by Congress. But, EPA just doesn't know when to quit either because the same people remain there year after year getting their big Federal salaries to defend what they want to do and how they want to do it - which does not include hearing bad news from whistleblowers and EEO complainants. Their track record for processing complaints from employees and community groups is abysmal so that they spend more taxpayer money for consultants instead of fixing the problems. This site outlines many of the more recent problems including the Administrator's appointment of Rafael DeLeon as the Director of Civil Rights after the decade-long nonperformance and problems of the previous Director, Karen Higginbotham.
Susan M. Morris: After working years as a highly-successful civil rights professional in four major federal Executive Departments, Ms. Morris transferred into EPA hoping to make it a model EEO program. Instead, she found herself surrounded by incompetence, shirkers, slackers, shoppers and sleepers. Internally, she raised her objections and frustration with employees playing computer games, sleeping in their cubicles, shopping on government time, spreading lies and gossiping, threatening employees, name-calling, and violating employees' rights by not using the merit system for promotions and hiring, management hiring their own children into the summer intern program instead of needy children in the area, hiring their friends and engaging in nepotism, and violating the personnel and civil rights laws and regulations. Finally, after the EPA had not filed three years of reports required for Congress on civil rights within the EPA and the EPA Office of Inspector General took no actions regarding the prohibited personnel practices or violations, she reported her concerns to the EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson and management officials. As an EPA Whistleblower, the usual system came into play. She was isolated, accused of various infractions (never performance related), falsely written about in an OIG report as having a personal problem that did not exist, threatened by one of the "Good Ole' Boys," discredited and endured character assassination. Finally, her work was reduced and removed, she was transferred to a nonexistent position, accused of "insubordination," and removed. The Office of Special Counsel, under the new Special Counsel Lerner, wrote to the EPA Administrator in September 2010 stating that the agency retaliated against Ms. Morris for whistleblowing, she should be returned to the agency and receive other relief. Instead, EPA decided to again go for broke and hang stupid. Morris is currently in District Court and awaiting the next step of OSC on her behalf.
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo Again: No one can ever say that EPA learns from their mistakes. They just don't get it. Rafael DeLeon, the current Director of Civil Rights and his mentor, Ray Spears, decided to go after Dr. Coleman-Adebayo again. They used the civil rights system itself to transfer her out of her position to a position under their authority. At first, she only reported to Ray Spears, but when his protege DeLeon got in trouble and was removed for violations as the Director of Human Resources, he had him transferred so that he was now Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's first line supervisor and Mr. Spears the second line. Together, they engaged the assistance of Mr. Spears' other protege, Karen Higginbotham, and her subordinate, William Haig, to remove her again from federal service. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo is again before District Court.
Dr. Cate Jenkins Again: As kids we would say, "Repeat and Repeat are out in a boat, Repeat fell off and who was left?" Of course, the answer was "Repeat," so we repeated the same thing over and over. EPA is a prime example of repeat and repeat. Dr. Cate Jenkins was just reinstated as published in all of the newspapers across the country. The New York Times reported on May 8, 2012 that "E.P.A. Chemist Who Warned of Ground Zero Dust is Reinstated." The article continues by stating that Dr. Jenkins "was removed from her job in retaliation for accusing the agency of underestimating the toxicity of dust at ground zero." Dr. Jenkins sued under the Whistleblower Protection Act stating that she was retaliated against for exposing the fact that the data being relied on with respect to the World Trade Center Ground Zero cleanup was being mismeasured. She was then accused of having similar "female problems" that Dr. Coleman-Adebayo and Susan Morris suffered from by EPA management. A list of them includes: insubordination; discourteous, unprofessional and bullying conduct toward colleagues; threatening or disparaging remarks about supervisors; violations of time and attendance or refusing to come to work; to name just a few. These behaviors resulted in isolation, removal of work, transfers, created or non-positions, suspensions, and eventually removal. It was never about the fine work accomplished by these senior women - it was all about the politics.
More later.........
STOP FRACKING in our NATIONAL Forests
Tell the U.S. Forest Service that fracking is risky and has no place in our national forests. I did! To take action on this issue, copy and paste the link below:
http://action.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=zTGFS8hZfjYhf8GAeicGrA&id=8783
http://action.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=zTGFS8hZfjYhf8GAeicGrA&id=8783
Grassley follows up with USDA about discrimination claims
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley has asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture for a status report on the agency’s effort to improve its process for resolving discrimination claims made by employees following independent assessments that recommended improvements in 2008 and 2011.
“The discrimination issues and delays in resolving claims are not a new issue for the Department of Agriculture, but it’s time for a clear indication that systemic problems are being resolved. To date, the agency response to questions about progress being made have been somewhat vague and inadequate,” Grassley said.
The Iowa senator made his request for a status report in a letter sent today to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. Click here to read Grassley’s letter to Vilsack.
Both a 2008 report of the Government Accountability Office, which is the investigative arm of Congress, and a 2011 Jackson Lewis report commissioned by the Department of Agriculture identified problems in the way the agency managed employee claims of discrimination and made recommendations for improvements.
-30-
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley has asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture for a status report on the agency’s effort to improve its process for resolving discrimination claims made by employees following independent assessments that recommended improvements in 2008 and 2011.
“The discrimination issues and delays in resolving claims are not a new issue for the Department of Agriculture, but it’s time for a clear indication that systemic problems are being resolved. To date, the agency response to questions about progress being made have been somewhat vague and inadequate,” Grassley said.
The Iowa senator made his request for a status report in a letter sent today to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. Click here to read Grassley’s letter to Vilsack.
Both a 2008 report of the Government Accountability Office, which is the investigative arm of Congress, and a 2011 Jackson Lewis report commissioned by the Department of Agriculture identified problems in the way the agency managed employee claims of discrimination and made recommendations for improvements.
-30-
Serious Problems Continue at EPA under Administrator Lisa Jackson May 11, 2012
As outlined in the article below from "Public Employees for Environmental Responsibilities (PEER)," Dr. Cate Jenkins, an EPA scientist, reported the dangers inherent at Ground Zero at the World Trade Center site for the workers during the Busch Administration, then was terminated in December 2010 from her position, only to be returned by the Merit Systems Protection Board. This is nothing new at EPA. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, a senior policy analyst, was terminated after exposing vanadium poisoning by a U.S. company in South Africa. After a jury trial, she was returned to her position at EPA and received compensatory damages for the years of retaliation she suffered. Her recent book, "No Fear, A Whistleblower's Triumph Over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA," tells her story and struggle at EPA. This does not appear to stop EPA either. They allowed and supported Rafael DeLeon, the current Civil Rights Director, and his mentor, Ray Spears, Deputy Chief of Staff, to do it again. Evidently, EPA never heard that if you continue to do the same things, you will probably get the same results.
In September 2010, the Office of Special Counsel wrote to Administrator Jackson that a long-term civil rights professional, Susan M. Morris, was retaliated by the Administrator's management for exposing EPA's violation of civil rights laws for three years and numerous prohibited personnel practices. As in the case of Jenkins, Morris filed complaints with the EPA Inspector General, Congress, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Office of Special Counsel. She said she was also isolated, harassed, and terminated based on a lithany of unfounded charges. "It appears that they make it up as they go along at EPA because they cannot get you legitimately," said Morris. "EPA uses the same old tricks against employees, particularly women and minorities, citing poor performance, they do not get along with others, and/or they are insubordinate or threaten people. We had three women in the Office of Civil Rights threatened by a man in our office, yet he wasn't fired. I understand a male in another organization had to attend anger management classes because of his problems. Yet, a petite woman, such as Dr. Jenkins, is fired for threatening her 6 foot supervisor?"
Morris, a long-term senior manager and civil rights subject matter expert said, "Because they could not use performance against me, they tried other methods. It became so bizarre that they accused me of instigating an altercation when I objected to an admin employee, who was a friend of the Director visiting the office, interfering in a discussion I was having with a subordinate, started screaming and later calling me a "bitch." They also used insubordination to justify their retaliation, yet I worked successfully for 3-Star Generals for 10 years and was never insubordinate. I guess they believe I waited to come to little EPA before I decided to go bad." Morris has years of exceptional performance awards, commendations from industry, community organizations and four Federal Departments, with two medals, including "The Department of Army Meritorious Civilian Service Award," a "Distinguished Public Service Award from National Image," and nominations by her staff for three years for the "EPA Administrator's Manager of the Year Award." Morris said she was not surprised about the failure to allow discovery because that was also the case with her and others. "The processing of complaints at EPA is horrendous and a travesty of justice. They actually lost a complaint I filed and threw together a Report of Investigation that was such a mess that the Administrative Judge told them to get it together. Their current reports to EEOC are filled with errors and their processing times since Mr. DeLeon took office are even more pitiful," said Morris.
A Whistleblower Conference scheduled May 21-23, 2012 will include a press conference on May 22 starting at 11:30 am at the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial where a "No Fear Report Card" will be published of agencies, such as EPA, that continue to violate civil rights and whistleblower laws and regulations.
In September 2010, the Office of Special Counsel wrote to Administrator Jackson that a long-term civil rights professional, Susan M. Morris, was retaliated by the Administrator's management for exposing EPA's violation of civil rights laws for three years and numerous prohibited personnel practices. As in the case of Jenkins, Morris filed complaints with the EPA Inspector General, Congress, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Office of Special Counsel. She said she was also isolated, harassed, and terminated based on a lithany of unfounded charges. "It appears that they make it up as they go along at EPA because they cannot get you legitimately," said Morris. "EPA uses the same old tricks against employees, particularly women and minorities, citing poor performance, they do not get along with others, and/or they are insubordinate or threaten people. We had three women in the Office of Civil Rights threatened by a man in our office, yet he wasn't fired. I understand a male in another organization had to attend anger management classes because of his problems. Yet, a petite woman, such as Dr. Jenkins, is fired for threatening her 6 foot supervisor?"
Morris, a long-term senior manager and civil rights subject matter expert said, "Because they could not use performance against me, they tried other methods. It became so bizarre that they accused me of instigating an altercation when I objected to an admin employee, who was a friend of the Director visiting the office, interfering in a discussion I was having with a subordinate, started screaming and later calling me a "bitch." They also used insubordination to justify their retaliation, yet I worked successfully for 3-Star Generals for 10 years and was never insubordinate. I guess they believe I waited to come to little EPA before I decided to go bad." Morris has years of exceptional performance awards, commendations from industry, community organizations and four Federal Departments, with two medals, including "The Department of Army Meritorious Civilian Service Award," a "Distinguished Public Service Award from National Image," and nominations by her staff for three years for the "EPA Administrator's Manager of the Year Award." Morris said she was not surprised about the failure to allow discovery because that was also the case with her and others. "The processing of complaints at EPA is horrendous and a travesty of justice. They actually lost a complaint I filed and threw together a Report of Investigation that was such a mess that the Administrative Judge told them to get it together. Their current reports to EEOC are filled with errors and their processing times since Mr. DeLeon took office are even more pitiful," said Morris.
A Whistleblower Conference scheduled May 21-23, 2012 will include a press conference on May 22 starting at 11:30 am at the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial where a "No Fear Report Card" will be published of agencies, such as EPA, that continue to violate civil rights and whistleblower laws and regulations.
CRUSADING EPA SCIENTIST RETURNED TO WORK
— Her Termination Thrown Out due to Constitutional Violations by Agency
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)
For Immediate Release: May 7, 2012
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
Washington, DC — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientist who raised the alarm about dangers to First Responders and residents at the World Trade Center conflagration has been ordered returned to her job by a federal civil service court, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The decision strengthens key safeguards for all federal whistleblowers.
Dr. Cate Jenkins, a senior chemist with more than three decades of agency tenure, publicly charged that due to falsified EPA standards First Responders waded into dust so corrosive that it caused chemical burns deep within their respiratory system. After raising this issue to the EPA Inspector General, Congress and the FBI, Dr. Jenkins was isolated, harassed and ultimately removed from her position on December 30, 2010 by EPA based upon an un-witnessed claim that the soft-spoken, petite childhood polio survivor threatened her 6-foot male supervisor.
In a ruling dated May 4, 2012, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) unanimously vacated Dr. Jenkins’ termination and
ordered she be fully restored by May 25th and awarded back pay with interest. The decision faulted both the EPA and its own administrative judge for serious legal errors, including:
What happened to Dr. Jenkins was a crude railroading of a dedicated public servant. It is refreshing to see justice done by her,” stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein, who led Dr. Jenkins’ legal team. “Returning Dr. Jenkins to her position is just a start. We intend to hold responsible officials accountable and ask EPA to look very closely at this case with an eye toward preventing any more travesties like this.”
The holdings in the Jenkins case will help make sure that agency disciplinary decisions are fairly reached. Moreover, the ruling helps prevent agencies from hiding the ball to cover up political machinations.
“This ruling underlines some of the serious procedural defects that have historically made MSPB an assembly line for injustice against whistleblowers,” Dinerstein added, noting that it was same judge who decided against and then was reversed by the
full MSPB board which ordered the restorations of U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers in 2011. “Hopefully, this ruling will make the initial decisions by MSPB judges more thoughtful and evenhanded.”
Meanwhile, EPA has not corrected the mistakes it made on 9/11. Last year, PEER on Dr. Jenkins’ behalf filed a formal rule-making petition demanding that EPA dramatically tighten its corrosivity standard so that responders would be alerted to use personal protection equipment to prevent lung respiratory damage. The petition would bring the U.S. into line with standards in force in the European Union, Canada and adopted by the United Nations since at least1970. EPA has yet to respond to
the petition. ###
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)
For Immediate Release: May 7, 2012
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
Washington, DC — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientist who raised the alarm about dangers to First Responders and residents at the World Trade Center conflagration has been ordered returned to her job by a federal civil service court, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The decision strengthens key safeguards for all federal whistleblowers.
Dr. Cate Jenkins, a senior chemist with more than three decades of agency tenure, publicly charged that due to falsified EPA standards First Responders waded into dust so corrosive that it caused chemical burns deep within their respiratory system. After raising this issue to the EPA Inspector General, Congress and the FBI, Dr. Jenkins was isolated, harassed and ultimately removed from her position on December 30, 2010 by EPA based upon an un-witnessed claim that the soft-spoken, petite childhood polio survivor threatened her 6-foot male supervisor.
In a ruling dated May 4, 2012, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) unanimously vacated Dr. Jenkins’ termination and
ordered she be fully restored by May 25th and awarded back pay with interest. The decision faulted both the EPA and its own administrative judge for serious legal errors, including:
- Dr. Jenkins’ constitutional right to due process was violated because EPA fired her on an entirely new charge it had not previously even raised;
- The MSPB judge improperly prevented introduction of evidence for a whistleblower defense; and
- Dr. Jenkins was improperly blocked from conducting discovery on a number of issues, including the apparent high-level collusion to remove her.
What happened to Dr. Jenkins was a crude railroading of a dedicated public servant. It is refreshing to see justice done by her,” stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein, who led Dr. Jenkins’ legal team. “Returning Dr. Jenkins to her position is just a start. We intend to hold responsible officials accountable and ask EPA to look very closely at this case with an eye toward preventing any more travesties like this.”
The holdings in the Jenkins case will help make sure that agency disciplinary decisions are fairly reached. Moreover, the ruling helps prevent agencies from hiding the ball to cover up political machinations.
“This ruling underlines some of the serious procedural defects that have historically made MSPB an assembly line for injustice against whistleblowers,” Dinerstein added, noting that it was same judge who decided against and then was reversed by the
full MSPB board which ordered the restorations of U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers in 2011. “Hopefully, this ruling will make the initial decisions by MSPB judges more thoughtful and evenhanded.”
Meanwhile, EPA has not corrected the mistakes it made on 9/11. Last year, PEER on Dr. Jenkins’ behalf filed a formal rule-making petition demanding that EPA dramatically tighten its corrosivity standard so that responders would be alerted to use personal protection equipment to prevent lung respiratory damage. The petition would bring the U.S. into line with standards in force in the European Union, Canada and adopted by the United Nations since at least1970. EPA has yet to respond to
the petition. ###
Bill to Expand Protections for Whistleblowers and Taxpayers
Passes the Senate by Unanimous Consent
For Immediate Release:
May 9, 2012
WASHINGTON, D.C.—In an unusual display of unanimity, yesterday the Senate passed the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2011 (WPEA), S. 743, a landmark bill that would expand protections for federal employees who disclose wrongdoing and protect the public trust. The bill has had a storied past over the past decade as various versions have been introduced, debated, and passed. In 2010, when it seemed enactment was finally certain, an unrelated controversy about Wikileaks muddled the debate and killed the bill.
Two senators placed “secret holds” on the bill in the last hours of the 111th Congress and left town for the holidays. In fact, the WPEA has little to do with Wikileaks—except in that it will create lawful safe channels for disclosures and reduce unauthorized leaks. The Senate has affirmed that this anti-leaks, anti-corruption bill is a timely reform. The WPEA will modernize the government whistleblower law by ensuring legitimate disclosures of wrong-
doing will be protected, increasing government accountability to taxpayers, and saving billions of taxpayer dollars by helping expose fraud, waste and abuse. The WPEA will also restore and expand free speech rights, specifically covering national security and intelligence community workers, federal scientists, and Transportation Security Administration officers. The bill also will strengthen failed procedures; close loopholes; create efficiencies; and affirm lawful disclosures.
For the first time, some federal whistleblowers would have a real “day in court,” since the bill provides access to a jury trial in federal district court. The longtime champion for this reform and for whistleblowers, Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), was joined by 14 co-sponsors, including, Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), and Jon Tester (D-Mont.). Our groups thank these senators for their leadership and their staff for their tireless efforts in advancing this critical reform legislation. But now the bill must become law. A companion bill in the House, the Platts-Van Hollen Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (H.R. 3289), introduced by Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and co-sponsored by Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Todd Platts (R-Pa.), Steve Pearce (R-New Mex.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), has stalled since the Oversight and Government Reform Committee passed it in November.
Rep. Issa has promised to move the bill, stating, “We will get it through in this Congress.” We urge him and the House leadership to move swiftly now to pass the WPEA to prove their commitment to tackling waste and increasing accountability to the American taxpayer.
Beltway Accountability Groups Ignore News
NGO Watch: Beltway accountability groups ignore news that cabinet department has been violating a major whistleblower law for almost a decade
Posted by mspbwatch on May 8, 2012 in Uncategorized
Almost a week ago, this blog and fellow advocate site Whistlewatch.org broke the news that the Department of Health and Human Services has failed to submit annual
reports to Congress about whistleblower retaliation and discrimination data, each and every year since passage of the No FEAR Act of 2002. But it’s been a week and the top whistleblowing advocacy groups in the nation, the Government Accountability Project, the Project on Government Oversight, and the National Whistleblowers Center,
have ignored this news since it came out. Nor does it seem that they discovered this violation at all in the past decade. Why?
Posted by mspbwatch on May 8, 2012 in Uncategorized
Almost a week ago, this blog and fellow advocate site Whistlewatch.org broke the news that the Department of Health and Human Services has failed to submit annual
reports to Congress about whistleblower retaliation and discrimination data, each and every year since passage of the No FEAR Act of 2002. But it’s been a week and the top whistleblowing advocacy groups in the nation, the Government Accountability Project, the Project on Government Oversight, and the National Whistleblowers Center,
have ignored this news since it came out. Nor does it seem that they discovered this violation at all in the past decade. Why?
Data on Whistleblowers in Federal Government
We are gathering information and data on Whistleblowers throughout the Federal government. If you are a Whistleblower please write to us.
CRUSADING EPA SCIENTIST RETURNED TO WORK May 7, 2012
Her Termination Thrown Out due to Constitutional Violations by Agency
For Immediate Release
Monday, May 7, 2012
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
Washington, DC — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientist who raised the alarm about dangers to First Responders and residents at the World Trade Center conflagration has been ordered returned to her job by a federal civil service court, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The decision strengthens key safeguards for all federal whistleblowers.
Dr. Cate Jenkins, a senior chemist with more than three decades of agency tenure, publicly charged that due to falsified EPA standards First Responders waded into dust so corrosive that it caused chemical burns deep within their respiratory system. After raising this issue to the EPA Inspector General, Congress and the FBI, Dr. Jenkins was isolated, harassed and ultimately removed from her position on December 30, 2010 by EPA based upon an unwitnessed claim that the soft-spoken, petite childhood polio survivor threatened her 6-foot male supervisor.
In a ruling dated May 4, 2011, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) unanimously vacated Dr. Jenkins’ termination and ordered she be fully restored by May 25th and awarded back pay with interest. The decision faulted both the EPA and its own administrative judge for serious legal errors, including –
Dr. Jenkins’ constitutional right to due process was violated because EPA fired her on an entirely new charge it had not previously even raised; the MSPB judge improperly prevented introduction of evidence for a whistleblower defense; and Dr. Jenkins was improperly blocked from conducting discovery on a number of issues, including the apparent high-level collusion to remove her.
“What happened to Dr. Jenkins was a crude railroading of a dedicated public servant. It is refreshing to see justice done by her,” stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein, who led Dr. Jenkins’ legal team. “Returning Dr. Jenkins to her position is just a start. We intend to hold responsible officials accountable and ask EPA to look very closely at this case with an eye toward preventing any more travesties like this.”
The holdings in the Jenkins case will help make sure that agency disciplinary decisions are fairly reached. Moreover, the ruling helps prevent agencies from hiding the ball to cover up political machinations.
“This ruling underlines some of the serious procedural defects that have historically made MSPB an assembly line for injustice against whistleblowers,” Dinerstein added, noting that it was same judge who decided against and then was reversed by the full MSPB board which ordered the restorations of U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers in 2011. “Hopefully, this ruling will make the initial decisions by MSPB judges more thoughtful and evenhanded.”
Meanwhile, EPA has not corrected the mistakes it made on 9/11. Last year, PEER on Dr. Jenkins’ behalf filed a formal rule-making petition demanding that EPA dramatically tighten its corrosivity standard so that responders would be alerted to use personal protection equipment to prevent lung respiratory damage. The petition would bring the U.S. into line with standards in force in the European Union, Canada and adopted by the United Nations since at least1970. EPA has yet to respond to the petition. ###
For Immediate Release
Monday, May 7, 2012
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
Washington, DC — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientist who raised the alarm about dangers to First Responders and residents at the World Trade Center conflagration has been ordered returned to her job by a federal civil service court, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The decision strengthens key safeguards for all federal whistleblowers.
Dr. Cate Jenkins, a senior chemist with more than three decades of agency tenure, publicly charged that due to falsified EPA standards First Responders waded into dust so corrosive that it caused chemical burns deep within their respiratory system. After raising this issue to the EPA Inspector General, Congress and the FBI, Dr. Jenkins was isolated, harassed and ultimately removed from her position on December 30, 2010 by EPA based upon an unwitnessed claim that the soft-spoken, petite childhood polio survivor threatened her 6-foot male supervisor.
In a ruling dated May 4, 2011, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) unanimously vacated Dr. Jenkins’ termination and ordered she be fully restored by May 25th and awarded back pay with interest. The decision faulted both the EPA and its own administrative judge for serious legal errors, including –
Dr. Jenkins’ constitutional right to due process was violated because EPA fired her on an entirely new charge it had not previously even raised; the MSPB judge improperly prevented introduction of evidence for a whistleblower defense; and Dr. Jenkins was improperly blocked from conducting discovery on a number of issues, including the apparent high-level collusion to remove her.
“What happened to Dr. Jenkins was a crude railroading of a dedicated public servant. It is refreshing to see justice done by her,” stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein, who led Dr. Jenkins’ legal team. “Returning Dr. Jenkins to her position is just a start. We intend to hold responsible officials accountable and ask EPA to look very closely at this case with an eye toward preventing any more travesties like this.”
The holdings in the Jenkins case will help make sure that agency disciplinary decisions are fairly reached. Moreover, the ruling helps prevent agencies from hiding the ball to cover up political machinations.
“This ruling underlines some of the serious procedural defects that have historically made MSPB an assembly line for injustice against whistleblowers,” Dinerstein added, noting that it was same judge who decided against and then was reversed by the full MSPB board which ordered the restorations of U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers in 2011. “Hopefully, this ruling will make the initial decisions by MSPB judges more thoughtful and evenhanded.”
Meanwhile, EPA has not corrected the mistakes it made on 9/11. Last year, PEER on Dr. Jenkins’ behalf filed a formal rule-making petition demanding that EPA dramatically tighten its corrosivity standard so that responders would be alerted to use personal protection equipment to prevent lung respiratory damage. The petition would bring the U.S. into line with standards in force in the European Union, Canada and adopted by the United Nations since at least1970. EPA has yet to respond to the petition. ###
WHISTLEBLOWER SUMMIT - Civil & Human Rights Conference - May 21-23, 2012
The ACORN 8 (http://www.acorn8.com ) and the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees will co-host this year's Whistleblower Summit--Civil & Human Rights
Conference in Washington, DC. Due to overwhelming interest, the historic event has grown and is extended to May 21-23, 2012. This Civil & Human Rights Conference will focus on three themes 1) Obama's War on Whistleblowers, 2) workplace violence or Obama's War on Women, and 3) Count It Up--adding up the total costs of retaliation and discrimination. The following Letter to President Barack Obama about workplace violence at the U.S. Department of Agriculture was written by Les Donnelly one of the participants in this year's historic conference.
Conference in Washington, DC. Due to overwhelming interest, the historic event has grown and is extended to May 21-23, 2012. This Civil & Human Rights Conference will focus on three themes 1) Obama's War on Whistleblowers, 2) workplace violence or Obama's War on Women, and 3) Count It Up--adding up the total costs of retaliation and discrimination. The following Letter to President Barack Obama about workplace violence at the U.S. Department of Agriculture was written by Les Donnelly one of the participants in this year's historic conference.
Federal Wall of Shame!
I only have one problem with the fabulous article below by Tanya Ward Jordan - there are so many more shameless Federal bureaucrats who need to be on her Federal Wall of Shame! Where is Administrator Lisa P. Jackson? I guess the list would be too long.......
Last night I finished Sibel Edmonds' book Classified Woman, recommended reading for anyone outside the Washington DC beltway because it depicts an environment that is unbelievable, entrenched and institutionalized in the large bureaucratic environment in the nation's capital. The book is a must read showing the extent our government will go to squash Whistleblowers. Those of us in the Federal government in D.C. know what is really going on and the reason why Whistleblower's have to be smashed so nothing gets out to show how corrupt our government is and has become. My father, who was what I consider, a true "American" fought for this country in World War II to remain free. If he were alive today, he would be appalled by what we have allowed to happen in the name of "9-11" and "terrorism." Big Business, Big Government, Big Money - Big Corruption.
Many years ago, prior to 9-11, two policemen were outside my father's house, but not yet on my parent's property. A heated discussion ensued, one policeman began to put his foot on my father's property. He told him to remove his foot because the property was his - he pays taxes, he owns the property and unless there was something wrong, the policeman had no right to put his foot on his land. As a family, we laughed at my father's audacity, but we were used to it. All of our life we were told that we were Americans; this was our country, our family, our property for which my father fought and he and my mother worked. They paid his taxes, followed the laws, raised their children and believed in the rights granted under the Constitution. Can you imagine what would happen to my father today? I believe he would be arrested and jailed. I have personally become afraid in my own country. I feel as if "Big Brother" has arrived and it's really scary. Who can we trust to tell the truth - lying is a way of life in Washington, not only by the politicians, but the bureaucrats. Who can we trust to ensure that our rights are upheld? The Courts, the Department of Justice, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Office of Special Counsel, the Inspector General's Offices, the Congress - try them and notice how many people make it through the system intact.
My parents instilled in us values and principles that Americans appear to have lost. The terrorists have won when we allow that to happen. Take a look at the U.S. budget and notice the amount of taxpayer dollars that go into the military-industrial complex, look at the industrial contractors that suck the money out of the agencies, check out the number of Federal employees filing complaints and twhistleblowing, then check the resultant costs incurred by the government to destroy them, check Homeland Security, Secret Service, CIA, FBI, DOD ....... It is any wonder that Americans sit by the "Boob Tube" to watch reality television shows because they are uninformed, tired, naive, or a myriad of other reasons. The more time they sit in front of their tubes, the more time the Big Boys (and some girls) have to use their power and money to take away their benefits and rights as Americans.
Last night I finished Sibel Edmonds' book Classified Woman, recommended reading for anyone outside the Washington DC beltway because it depicts an environment that is unbelievable, entrenched and institutionalized in the large bureaucratic environment in the nation's capital. The book is a must read showing the extent our government will go to squash Whistleblowers. Those of us in the Federal government in D.C. know what is really going on and the reason why Whistleblower's have to be smashed so nothing gets out to show how corrupt our government is and has become. My father, who was what I consider, a true "American" fought for this country in World War II to remain free. If he were alive today, he would be appalled by what we have allowed to happen in the name of "9-11" and "terrorism." Big Business, Big Government, Big Money - Big Corruption.
Many years ago, prior to 9-11, two policemen were outside my father's house, but not yet on my parent's property. A heated discussion ensued, one policeman began to put his foot on my father's property. He told him to remove his foot because the property was his - he pays taxes, he owns the property and unless there was something wrong, the policeman had no right to put his foot on his land. As a family, we laughed at my father's audacity, but we were used to it. All of our life we were told that we were Americans; this was our country, our family, our property for which my father fought and he and my mother worked. They paid his taxes, followed the laws, raised their children and believed in the rights granted under the Constitution. Can you imagine what would happen to my father today? I believe he would be arrested and jailed. I have personally become afraid in my own country. I feel as if "Big Brother" has arrived and it's really scary. Who can we trust to tell the truth - lying is a way of life in Washington, not only by the politicians, but the bureaucrats. Who can we trust to ensure that our rights are upheld? The Courts, the Department of Justice, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Office of Special Counsel, the Inspector General's Offices, the Congress - try them and notice how many people make it through the system intact.
My parents instilled in us values and principles that Americans appear to have lost. The terrorists have won when we allow that to happen. Take a look at the U.S. budget and notice the amount of taxpayer dollars that go into the military-industrial complex, look at the industrial contractors that suck the money out of the agencies, check out the number of Federal employees filing complaints and twhistleblowing, then check the resultant costs incurred by the government to destroy them, check Homeland Security, Secret Service, CIA, FBI, DOD ....... It is any wonder that Americans sit by the "Boob Tube" to watch reality television shows because they are uninformed, tired, naive, or a myriad of other reasons. The more time they sit in front of their tubes, the more time the Big Boys (and some girls) have to use their power and money to take away their benefits and rights as Americans.
Federal Wall of Shame-Michael Branch, Jana Brooks, David Duke, Terry Fred, Craig Littlejohn, Sara Revell & . . .
By Ward Jordan (about the author) opednews.com
On May 15, 2002, President George W. Bush signed the Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002. The United States federal law, popularly called the No FEAR Act, is also known as Public Law 107--174. The "No FEAR" Act was passed to discourage federal managers from engaging in unlawful discrimination and retaliation which threatens the well-being of subordinate employees and impairs the efficiency of government operations. Today, nearly a decade since the passage of "No FEAR," employment discrimination complaints are on the rise, and "terror," whichMerriam-Webster chiefly defines as "state of intense fear," encases the federal landscape.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a press release last July citing "retaliation" was the most common discrimination charge against the federal government", our nation's largest employer. According to the EEOC, federal employees and applicants filed 17,583 complaints of employment discrimination during fiscal year 2010, a 3.75 percent increase over the previous year.
No FEAR complaint statistics disclose a deteriorating workplace culture at the U.S. Department of Commerce, the cabinet department which is to "promote job creation and improved living standards for all Americans." Astoundingly, the number of "employment complaints filed against the Commerce
Department" catapulted from 131 in fiscal year 2008, to 412 in fiscal year 2009, to 1102 in fiscal year 2010.
To the detriment of the nation civil servants, who file complaints alleging federal workplace abuses, are typically left to perform critical duties in a poorly monitored and hostile environment. As a general rule, the civil servant "whistleblower" is forsakened by federalhuman resources management personnel and expected to efficiently "uphold the public trust" under the supervision of, at times, a bullying, sexist and/or racist manager. Moreover, those who blow the whistle on violations of law are
often unfairly appraised, denied pay increases, suspended, terminated, or in the case of a African-American paramedic with the U.S. Army --- threatened with bodily harm
Rarely are responsible management officials removed from federal service for egregious oppressive or unlawful behavior. Instead, some are seemingly "rewarded." Take for example U.S. Department of Interior's decision to award Craig Littlejohn a pay increase days after the EEOC ruled against the Department in a discrimination lawsuit. (Pierre vs Salazar) In this case, Littlejohn - a Chief Information Officer - reportedly referred to African-American subordinates as "monkeys" andimproperly interfered with the selection process of a Black applicant who wassignificantly more qualified than the selectee, according to the EEOC decision.Such negative reinforcements, like Interior's pay increase to a discriminatingofficial, only serves to breed a bullying culture of cover-up, conspiracy,insults, isolation, racism, reprisal, hostility, and harassment in the federal sector.
The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C), an employee advocacy and support group established in 2009 to expose racism and reprisal in the federal government, recently uploaded its' "Federal Officials Wall of Shame." The "Federal Officials Wall of Shame" serves to expose this very real problem of how Responsible Management Officials(RMOs) are creating "terror" In the federal workplace thereby, adversely impacting the mental, financial and physical health of civil servants. Many of the public officials cited on C4C's "Wall of Shame" listed below have engaged in violations of prohibited personnel practices, violations of civil rights laws, ethical violations and / or "reported acts" of racial/ethnic bullying. Examples of bullying include: abusing the evaluation process by lying about an employee's work performance; creating unrealistic deadlines; declaring the employee "insubordinate" for failing to follow arbitrary commands; assigning the employee undesirable work as punishment; falsely criticizing the employees' work quality; and threatening the complainant's job or reputation.
The following managers and supervisors have been listed on C4C's Federal Officials Wall of Shame:
Michael Branch (Captain) - Department of Justice Bureau of Prison, former chief correctional supervisor earned the nickname "Teflon Don." According to EEOC Hearing No. 410-2010-00330X, Branch was found culpable of subjecting employee to hostile work environment because of her sex. (Brooks v. Holder)
Jana Brooks - Commerce's former Safety and Health Specialist was found culpable of "mismanaging" asbestos conditions and "knowingly" exposing Edgar D. Lee, a Gulf War Veteran as well as other employees and contractors to unsafe dangerous levels of airborne asbestos.
David Duke -Air National Guard official who the EEOC found held records improperly labeling an African-American Management Analyst a "National Security Risk" after she filed an EEO complaint. (James v. Roche)
Terry Fred - Assistant Chief Marshal with the U.S. Marshal Service has been named as a RMO in a pending employment complaint filed by a class agent in the race
discrimination class action complaint filed by African-American Marshals. (Grogan, et. al v. Mukasey) [Terry Fred was also once arrested for drunken driving in a government owned vehicle.]
Carrie Hunnicutt - Department of Homeland Inspector reportedly destroyed trial evidence involving a class action complaint filed by African American Secret Service Agents (Moore, et. al vs Chertoff).
Dr. Charles Peterson - National Institute of Health (NIH) employee fired an African-American scientist that exposed the "cloning" of African-American study participants without consent of the parent or guardian. (Bonds v Leavitt N0. 09-2179)
Sara Revell - Warden of the Federal Correctional Complex, Butner North Carolinawas found culpable in the harassment and retaliation of an African-American Bureau of Prison Inventory Management Specialist. (McFadden v. Holder, Jr. EEOC 430-2009-00428X)
Ron Sacco - U.S. Postal Service supervisor who reportedly physically assaulted an employee, punched him in the chest, spit in his face, and poked him in the eye.
(Mathirampuzha v. Potter)
Katherine Thompson - Interior's Assistant Regional Director for Business Services with the U.S. Department of Interior was found guilty of discrimination and setting
an African-American female employee up to fail. (Robinson v. Salazar)
Notably, the week of May 20 -22, 2012 federal whistleblowers and Occupy Washingtonactivists will unite on Capitol Hill to bring attention to the need for "RMO" accountability in government
http//www.coalition4change.or The Coalition For Change, Ic.(C4C). C4C is a "support group" and a proactive non-profit organization comprised of former and present employees who have been injured or ill-treated due to workplace discrimination and/or reprisal. Twitter name - C4CFED
On May 15, 2002, President George W. Bush signed the Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002. The United States federal law, popularly called the No FEAR Act, is also known as Public Law 107--174. The "No FEAR" Act was passed to discourage federal managers from engaging in unlawful discrimination and retaliation which threatens the well-being of subordinate employees and impairs the efficiency of government operations. Today, nearly a decade since the passage of "No FEAR," employment discrimination complaints are on the rise, and "terror," whichMerriam-Webster chiefly defines as "state of intense fear," encases the federal landscape.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a press release last July citing "retaliation" was the most common discrimination charge against the federal government", our nation's largest employer. According to the EEOC, federal employees and applicants filed 17,583 complaints of employment discrimination during fiscal year 2010, a 3.75 percent increase over the previous year.
No FEAR complaint statistics disclose a deteriorating workplace culture at the U.S. Department of Commerce, the cabinet department which is to "promote job creation and improved living standards for all Americans." Astoundingly, the number of "employment complaints filed against the Commerce
Department" catapulted from 131 in fiscal year 2008, to 412 in fiscal year 2009, to 1102 in fiscal year 2010.
To the detriment of the nation civil servants, who file complaints alleging federal workplace abuses, are typically left to perform critical duties in a poorly monitored and hostile environment. As a general rule, the civil servant "whistleblower" is forsakened by federalhuman resources management personnel and expected to efficiently "uphold the public trust" under the supervision of, at times, a bullying, sexist and/or racist manager. Moreover, those who blow the whistle on violations of law are
often unfairly appraised, denied pay increases, suspended, terminated, or in the case of a African-American paramedic with the U.S. Army --- threatened with bodily harm
Rarely are responsible management officials removed from federal service for egregious oppressive or unlawful behavior. Instead, some are seemingly "rewarded." Take for example U.S. Department of Interior's decision to award Craig Littlejohn a pay increase days after the EEOC ruled against the Department in a discrimination lawsuit. (Pierre vs Salazar) In this case, Littlejohn - a Chief Information Officer - reportedly referred to African-American subordinates as "monkeys" andimproperly interfered with the selection process of a Black applicant who wassignificantly more qualified than the selectee, according to the EEOC decision.Such negative reinforcements, like Interior's pay increase to a discriminatingofficial, only serves to breed a bullying culture of cover-up, conspiracy,insults, isolation, racism, reprisal, hostility, and harassment in the federal sector.
The Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C), an employee advocacy and support group established in 2009 to expose racism and reprisal in the federal government, recently uploaded its' "Federal Officials Wall of Shame." The "Federal Officials Wall of Shame" serves to expose this very real problem of how Responsible Management Officials(RMOs) are creating "terror" In the federal workplace thereby, adversely impacting the mental, financial and physical health of civil servants. Many of the public officials cited on C4C's "Wall of Shame" listed below have engaged in violations of prohibited personnel practices, violations of civil rights laws, ethical violations and / or "reported acts" of racial/ethnic bullying. Examples of bullying include: abusing the evaluation process by lying about an employee's work performance; creating unrealistic deadlines; declaring the employee "insubordinate" for failing to follow arbitrary commands; assigning the employee undesirable work as punishment; falsely criticizing the employees' work quality; and threatening the complainant's job or reputation.
The following managers and supervisors have been listed on C4C's Federal Officials Wall of Shame:
Michael Branch (Captain) - Department of Justice Bureau of Prison, former chief correctional supervisor earned the nickname "Teflon Don." According to EEOC Hearing No. 410-2010-00330X, Branch was found culpable of subjecting employee to hostile work environment because of her sex. (Brooks v. Holder)
Jana Brooks - Commerce's former Safety and Health Specialist was found culpable of "mismanaging" asbestos conditions and "knowingly" exposing Edgar D. Lee, a Gulf War Veteran as well as other employees and contractors to unsafe dangerous levels of airborne asbestos.
David Duke -Air National Guard official who the EEOC found held records improperly labeling an African-American Management Analyst a "National Security Risk" after she filed an EEO complaint. (James v. Roche)
Terry Fred - Assistant Chief Marshal with the U.S. Marshal Service has been named as a RMO in a pending employment complaint filed by a class agent in the race
discrimination class action complaint filed by African-American Marshals. (Grogan, et. al v. Mukasey) [Terry Fred was also once arrested for drunken driving in a government owned vehicle.]
Carrie Hunnicutt - Department of Homeland Inspector reportedly destroyed trial evidence involving a class action complaint filed by African American Secret Service Agents (Moore, et. al vs Chertoff).
Dr. Charles Peterson - National Institute of Health (NIH) employee fired an African-American scientist that exposed the "cloning" of African-American study participants without consent of the parent or guardian. (Bonds v Leavitt N0. 09-2179)
Sara Revell - Warden of the Federal Correctional Complex, Butner North Carolinawas found culpable in the harassment and retaliation of an African-American Bureau of Prison Inventory Management Specialist. (McFadden v. Holder, Jr. EEOC 430-2009-00428X)
Ron Sacco - U.S. Postal Service supervisor who reportedly physically assaulted an employee, punched him in the chest, spit in his face, and poked him in the eye.
(Mathirampuzha v. Potter)
Katherine Thompson - Interior's Assistant Regional Director for Business Services with the U.S. Department of Interior was found guilty of discrimination and setting
an African-American female employee up to fail. (Robinson v. Salazar)
Notably, the week of May 20 -22, 2012 federal whistleblowers and Occupy Washingtonactivists will unite on Capitol Hill to bring attention to the need for "RMO" accountability in government
http//www.coalition4change.or The Coalition For Change, Ic.(C4C). C4C is a "support group" and a proactive non-profit organization comprised of former and present employees who have been injured or ill-treated due to workplace discrimination and/or reprisal. Twitter name - C4CFED
Whistleblowers & MSPB
NATIONAL WHISTLEBLOWERS PROTECTION BLOG
Advocating Whistleblower Rights for over Twenty Years Published by: The National Whistleblowers Legal Defense & Education Fund
MSPB holds it can address due process in security clearance cases
Posted on May 3, 2012 by Richard Renner
In two landmark decisions last week, the federal Merit System Protection Board (MSPB) held that it does have the authority to enforce the procedural protections for federal employees who suffer adverse employment actions as a result of issues with their security clearances. The MSPB recognizes that it does not have authority to review the security determinations themselves, respecting the Supreme Court's decision in Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988). Still, federal employees are "entitled to constitutional due process when the agency indefinitely suspend[s] [them] from federal employment based on a suspension of access to classified information."
McGriff v. Department of the Navy, 2012 MSPB 62 (April 26, 2012), p. 12. Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner submitted a most helpful amicus brief urging the MSPB to reach this result.
In Buelna v. Department of Homeland Security, 2012 MSPB 63 (April 26, 2012), the Board reached the same result for a federal air marshal working at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) by applying the agency's Management Directive (MD) No. 1100.75-3. I reported in a 2009 blog post about a federal court decision concluding that Bunny Greenhouse could pursue a claim for her supervisor's refusal to submit her request for a security clearance. The new MSPB decisions represent a significant advance for national security whistleblowers who face shenanigans with their security clearances in reprisal for making lawful disclosures of misconduct by their agencies. Now they have recourse for violations of their due process rights, even if they cannot challenge a security decision about their clearance.
Congratulations to Corry McGriff's attorneys Laura O'Reilly and Neil Bonney of Virginia Beach,Virginia, to Alexander Buelna's attorney, Heffry Jacobsen of Tucson, Arizona, and the Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner and her legal staff, including Bruce Fong and Elisabeth Brown
Advocating Whistleblower Rights for over Twenty Years Published by: The National Whistleblowers Legal Defense & Education Fund
MSPB holds it can address due process in security clearance cases
Posted on May 3, 2012 by Richard Renner
In two landmark decisions last week, the federal Merit System Protection Board (MSPB) held that it does have the authority to enforce the procedural protections for federal employees who suffer adverse employment actions as a result of issues with their security clearances. The MSPB recognizes that it does not have authority to review the security determinations themselves, respecting the Supreme Court's decision in Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988). Still, federal employees are "entitled to constitutional due process when the agency indefinitely suspend[s] [them] from federal employment based on a suspension of access to classified information."
McGriff v. Department of the Navy, 2012 MSPB 62 (April 26, 2012), p. 12. Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner submitted a most helpful amicus brief urging the MSPB to reach this result.
In Buelna v. Department of Homeland Security, 2012 MSPB 63 (April 26, 2012), the Board reached the same result for a federal air marshal working at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) by applying the agency's Management Directive (MD) No. 1100.75-3. I reported in a 2009 blog post about a federal court decision concluding that Bunny Greenhouse could pursue a claim for her supervisor's refusal to submit her request for a security clearance. The new MSPB decisions represent a significant advance for national security whistleblowers who face shenanigans with their security clearances in reprisal for making lawful disclosures of misconduct by their agencies. Now they have recourse for violations of their due process rights, even if they cannot challenge a security decision about their clearance.
Congratulations to Corry McGriff's attorneys Laura O'Reilly and Neil Bonney of Virginia Beach,Virginia, to Alexander Buelna's attorney, Heffry Jacobsen of Tucson, Arizona, and the Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner and her legal staff, including Bruce Fong and Elisabeth Brown
OBAMA Administration Political Appointees Ignore Civil Rights Laws
Under the Obama administration, you would think that if nothing else were done, the civil rights laws would be upheld. Instead, political appointees, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson, have not submitted mandatory reports. Ms. Jackson failed to send affirmative employment reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for three years (2006, 2007, and 2008) so they could be sent to Congress. The civil rights employee who reported this violation was retaliated against, while the violators remained. "My office was dismantled by this administration after I protested the corruption, prohibited personnel practices, and civil rights abuses. The destruction of my office is still in process, while the nonperforming and unproductive offices that process environmental complaints and employee complaints remain intact. This clearly shows that retaliation is alive and well at EPA," said Susan Morris, former Assistant Director in the Office of Civil Rights. "The situation was so egregious that employees nicknamed some of the slackers as, "Half Day, No Show, and the Sleeper." She lamented, "Employees shopped downtown on government time, played computer games, gossiped incessantly, and thought it was all one big joke. After working for industry in the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan area, then as a top Federal official in four major Departments, I could not believe what went on at EPA in that office and their total lack of
professionalism or concern for laws and regulations."
In September 2011, Morris received a finding of retaliation for whistleblowing from the Office of Special Counsel with a recommendation to Administrator Jackson to return her to the agency with full benefits, which has not been taken place to date. She has also filed a complaint in District Court, joining two other EPA employees, with two more women working their way up through the administrative system. "This is a waste of taxpayer money that I think is despicable when so many Americans are out of work. I never thought I would be a whistleblower, but feel that my integrity and honesty demanded it. Unfortunately, the promises to support whistleblowers has not happened either, so we are basically on our own," said Morris. She optimistically said, "In the end, I believe we will prevail."
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
It was reported that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) failed to submit mandatory No Fear Act reports to Congress (see article below). The Whistleblower's Unite - Conference and Rally, scheduled for May 21-23 in Washington, DC, will be publishing "Civil Rights and No Fear Report Cards" on Federal agencies.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 17:33, May 2, 2012 by Evelynn Brown, J.D., LL.M under: Government | Discuss
FOIA 12-0404-2 89skhnt
Breaking News
This is an update to our post of April 23, 2011 re; Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain information on No Fear Act reports to Congress. The reply from the Office of the Inspector General (IG) for all operational divisions is nauseating! The federal agency responsible for the health care of all Americans has flown under the radar for 10 years, violating federal law.
As the above letter articulated, the IG conducted a thorough search and found no records. This means that HHS has provided zero reports to Congress in defiance of federal law; The Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 commonly known as the No Fear Act. This law seeks to discourage federal managers and supervisors from engaging in unlawful discrimination and retaliation. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo is a champion for the civil rights of federal workers. Her case is the seed that planted the tree on this law.
A lay persons explanation of what is required under the law can be found here on Wikipedia and below. No-FEAR_Act The main provision of the No-FEAR Act, Section 201, is to require federal agencies to pay awards for discrimination and retaliation violations out of their own budgets. They are required to reimburse the General Fund of the Treasury within a reasonable time of any such award.
Section 202 requires notification to all federal employees and applicants for employment about their rights under federal law. Such notification is now made on the Internet. All federal agencies are also required to provide training to all their employees about their rights and remedies under antidiscrimination and anti-retaliation laws.
Finally, Section 203 requires annual reports from each agency stating:
(1) the number of discrimination and retaliation cases filed against the agency;
(2) the status of those cases;
(3) the amount of money the agency must pay in connection with each case, stating separately the amount for the payment of attorneys’ fees, if any;
(4) the number of employees disciplined for discrimination, retaliation, harassment, or any other infraction of antidiscrimination and retaliation laws;
(5) equal employment opportunity data;
(6) the agency’s policy on disciplinary actions against Federal employees who discriminate or retaliate, and the number of employees who are disciplined in accordance with such policy and the specific nature of the disciplinary action taken;
(7) an analysis of the information including--
(A) an examination of trends;
(B) causal analysis;
(C) practical knowledge gained through experience; and
(D) any actions planned or taken to improve complaint or civil rights programs of the agency; and
(8) any adjustment to comply with the requirements under section 201.
The Act also permits rule-making, and requires studies of retaliation and discrimination by federal agencies.
We note our fellow advocate site MSPBWatch has posted the story and letter from HHS. foia-u-s-department-of-health-and-human-services-is-in-violation-of-the-no-fear-act-of-2002
Top EPA official resigns over 'crucify' comment
By DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press–2 days ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration's top environmental official in the oil-rich South Central region has resigned after Republicans targeted him over remarks made two years ago when he used the word "crucify" to describe how he would go after companies violating environmental laws.
In a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson sent Sunday, Al Armendariz says he regrets his words and stresses that they do not reflect his work as administrator of the five-state region including Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana. The environmental engineer apologized last week for his remarks.
A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, told The Associated Press that Armendariz has since received death threats. His resignation was effective Monday. Sam Coleman, a career official who led the agency's response to Hurricane Katrina and served as Armendariz' deputy, took over as acting regional administrator.
"I have come to the conclusion that my continued service will distract you and the agency from its important work," Armendariz wrote in the letter, which was obtained by the AP.
Republicans in Congress had called for Armendariz' firing after Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe highlighted the May 2010 speech last week as proof of what he refers to as EPA's assault on energy, particularly the technique of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. President Barack Obama appointed Armendariz in November 2009 at the urging of
Texas-based environmental groups.
The agency, perhaps more than any other, has found itself in the GOP's crosshairs. Republicans — including presidential contender Mitt Romney, who has called for Jackson herself to be fired — have blamed the agency for high gasoline prices and clamping down on American energy. Armendariz, who was based in Texas, frequently found himself at odds with the state government and the oil and gas industry, which are often aligned.
The scientist and environmental activist had long been frustrated by the government's inability to clean up Texas' notoriously polluted air, and he had testified on behalf of activist groups about just how badly the EPA and state environmental agencies had botched things. Ken Kramer, director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said "the only people who will celebrate his resignation are the polluters who continue to foul Texas air and the politicians who serve those special interests."
Several disputed contamination cases in Texas in which Armendariz was involved helped stoke environmental concerns over fracking, a technique in which oil and gas producers inject water, chemicals and sand underground at high pressures to fracture rock so gas can come out. In one case, the EPA issued an emergency order in 2010 accusing Range Resources of contaminating an aquifer west of Fort Worth and giving it 48 hours to provide clean drinking water to residents. Armendariz said he went around the state because it wasn't responding quickly enough. The order later was withdrawn after a state court ruled evidence that fracking had caused the contamination had been falsified.
"He was flat wrong," wrote more than two dozen lawmakers in a letter to Jackson sent Friday, calling for Armendariz' firing. Armendariz' speech was made in Dish, a small town northwest of Dallas, where testing has shown some groundwater contamination and elevated toxic air pollution after operators began fracking.
Referring to how the Romans once conquered villages in the Mediterranean, Armendariz said, "...they'd find the first five guys they saw and they'd crucify them."
"And so you make examples out of people who are in this case not complying with the law," he said. "Find people who are not complying with the law and you hit them as hard as you can and make examples of them."
___
Associated Press correspondent Angela K. Brown contributed reporting from Fort Worth, Texas.
Follow Dina Cappiello's environment coverage on Twitter (at)dinacappiello
Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration's top environmental official in the oil-rich South Central region has resigned after Republicans targeted him over remarks made two years ago when he used the word "crucify" to describe how he would go after companies violating environmental laws.
In a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson sent Sunday, Al Armendariz says he regrets his words and stresses that they do not reflect his work as administrator of the five-state region including Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana. The environmental engineer apologized last week for his remarks.
A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, told The Associated Press that Armendariz has since received death threats. His resignation was effective Monday. Sam Coleman, a career official who led the agency's response to Hurricane Katrina and served as Armendariz' deputy, took over as acting regional administrator.
"I have come to the conclusion that my continued service will distract you and the agency from its important work," Armendariz wrote in the letter, which was obtained by the AP.
Republicans in Congress had called for Armendariz' firing after Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe highlighted the May 2010 speech last week as proof of what he refers to as EPA's assault on energy, particularly the technique of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. President Barack Obama appointed Armendariz in November 2009 at the urging of
Texas-based environmental groups.
The agency, perhaps more than any other, has found itself in the GOP's crosshairs. Republicans — including presidential contender Mitt Romney, who has called for Jackson herself to be fired — have blamed the agency for high gasoline prices and clamping down on American energy. Armendariz, who was based in Texas, frequently found himself at odds with the state government and the oil and gas industry, which are often aligned.
The scientist and environmental activist had long been frustrated by the government's inability to clean up Texas' notoriously polluted air, and he had testified on behalf of activist groups about just how badly the EPA and state environmental agencies had botched things. Ken Kramer, director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said "the only people who will celebrate his resignation are the polluters who continue to foul Texas air and the politicians who serve those special interests."
Several disputed contamination cases in Texas in which Armendariz was involved helped stoke environmental concerns over fracking, a technique in which oil and gas producers inject water, chemicals and sand underground at high pressures to fracture rock so gas can come out. In one case, the EPA issued an emergency order in 2010 accusing Range Resources of contaminating an aquifer west of Fort Worth and giving it 48 hours to provide clean drinking water to residents. Armendariz said he went around the state because it wasn't responding quickly enough. The order later was withdrawn after a state court ruled evidence that fracking had caused the contamination had been falsified.
"He was flat wrong," wrote more than two dozen lawmakers in a letter to Jackson sent Friday, calling for Armendariz' firing. Armendariz' speech was made in Dish, a small town northwest of Dallas, where testing has shown some groundwater contamination and elevated toxic air pollution after operators began fracking.
Referring to how the Romans once conquered villages in the Mediterranean, Armendariz said, "...they'd find the first five guys they saw and they'd crucify them."
"And so you make examples out of people who are in this case not complying with the law," he said. "Find people who are not complying with the law and you hit them as hard as you can and make examples of them."
___
Associated Press correspondent Angela K. Brown contributed reporting from Fort Worth, Texas.
Follow Dina Cappiello's environment coverage on Twitter (at)dinacappiello
Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved
Whistleblowers Unite! Monday, May 21 and Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Washington D.C.
April 30, 2012
Whistleblowers have been retaliated against by this country for years and the problem has gotten much worse over the past several years under this administration. Instead of support for exposing government corruption, greed and misuse of taxpayers funds, whistleblowers are being harassed and fired. Promises were made, but not kept. President Obama needs to check in on his Secretaries and Administrators to find out what is going on with the whistleblowers in their Departments and agencies and to stop the assaults on women and people with disabilities. It appears that some of his appointees, such as the Administrator of the U.S. Envrionmental Protection Agency Lisa P. Jackson, have simply not gotten the message that the whistleblowers are the "good guys." It's time for this administration walk the talk! Americans are tired of the rhetoric.
The Office of Special Counsel found that two whistleblowers at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency were retaliated against, but Ms. Jackson has thumbed her nose at the reports and findings. She wants to hang tough and use taxpayer money to support "her" managers who violated the laws and regulations. She is also ignoring three complaints of retaliation in District Court naming her. What's going on here?
The General Service Administration (GSA) and Secret Service scandals are what happens when Federal employees are afraid to speak out as public servants and retaliated against for whistleblowing. Almost every Federal agency has something going on that whistleblowers, who have been willing to come forward on behalf of the American public placing their own lives and careers in jeopardy, have attempted to expose. In protest for the horrendous treatment they are receiving, whistleblowers and civil rights protesters will be uniting in Washington, DC, May 21 and 22, 2012 at a demonstration and conference.
Go to: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Whistleblowers-Unite-with-by-Michael-McCray-120421-622.html
More information to follow.
April 30, 2012
Whistleblowers have been retaliated against by this country for years and the problem has gotten much worse over the past several years under this administration. Instead of support for exposing government corruption, greed and misuse of taxpayers funds, whistleblowers are being harassed and fired. Promises were made, but not kept. President Obama needs to check in on his Secretaries and Administrators to find out what is going on with the whistleblowers in their Departments and agencies and to stop the assaults on women and people with disabilities. It appears that some of his appointees, such as the Administrator of the U.S. Envrionmental Protection Agency Lisa P. Jackson, have simply not gotten the message that the whistleblowers are the "good guys." It's time for this administration walk the talk! Americans are tired of the rhetoric.
The Office of Special Counsel found that two whistleblowers at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency were retaliated against, but Ms. Jackson has thumbed her nose at the reports and findings. She wants to hang tough and use taxpayer money to support "her" managers who violated the laws and regulations. She is also ignoring three complaints of retaliation in District Court naming her. What's going on here?
The General Service Administration (GSA) and Secret Service scandals are what happens when Federal employees are afraid to speak out as public servants and retaliated against for whistleblowing. Almost every Federal agency has something going on that whistleblowers, who have been willing to come forward on behalf of the American public placing their own lives and careers in jeopardy, have attempted to expose. In protest for the horrendous treatment they are receiving, whistleblowers and civil rights protesters will be uniting in Washington, DC, May 21 and 22, 2012 at a demonstration and conference.
Go to: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Whistleblowers-Unite-with-by-Michael-McCray-120421-622.html
More information to follow.
Third Letter to President Barack Obama - "War on Women" at U.S.D.A. Forest Service
The White House
President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 2050
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA - March 31, 2012
Dear Mr. President
This is my third letter to you in less than a year discussing civil rights abuses against federally employed women in the USDA/Forest Service. I am writing to you again to ask for assistance because the “War on Women” is very real and being perpetrated against women in the Forest Service, particularly Region 5, California. Secretary Vilsack has been completely non-responsive to our communications and we must rely on you to help address this problem.
On May 19, 2011, we made you aware of multiple issues of sex and race discrimination, and egregious incidents of sexual and physical assaults. During May and June we had hope because Valerie Jarrett’s aide Michael Blake advised us that the Obama administration was concerned about our claims and he contacted the Department of Agriculture about them. Also, around that time, Secretary Vilsack pulled Civil Rights and Employee Relations authority from the Forest Service and placed it under Assistant Secretary Pearlie Reed, with full decision-making authority lying with his Deputy Assistant Secretary Robin Heard. Ms. Heard told me she had total delegated authority to act for the Secretary on Civil Rights and Employee Relations matters. Ms. Heard actually gave me her word, a promise, that she would “fix” the civil rights problems in Region 5. She was convincing and I believed her.
In July 2011, Robin Heard advised me that Secretary Vilsack cried when he was told about the sexual and physical assaults upon the women in Region 5. Ms. Heard said the Secretary was serious that the discrimination and abuse would be stopped. She and I communicated almost daily from June through September 2011. Per her request, I brought many women and minority employees forward to speak with her. Ms. Heard said she wanted to settle the Vercruysse Class Complaint, admitting there was a good old boy network that undermined merit-based hiring and promotions of women. Unfortunately, putting Pearlie Reed and Robin Heard in charge amounted to putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. Every woman I recommended to speak with her has been retaliated against, including unwarranted disciplinary actions and termination. Some of these women will be writing their own letters to you.
I don’t know if Secretary Vilsack really cried, but I do know that he has not stopped the civil rights abuses. And, while conditions worsen for many women and minorities his staff still refuses to work with The Coalition or make any attempts to settle the Vercruysse Class. The USDA’s War on Women rages on and the battle for their careers continues.
On September 29, 2011, I wrote to you again Mr. President advising that conditions for women were worse, particularly retaliation. I expressed my concern that millions of dollars were being needlessly wasted by the USDA due to their refusal to deal with the Vercruysse Class Complaint and the individual complainants. The administration’s War on Women raged on.
In October 2011, four female Region 5 employees and I flew from California to Washington, D.C. to participate in the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees’ Filibuster in front of USDA. We met with Secretary Vilsack. He personally apologized to one of our group. Secretary Vilsack apologized to a Hispanic female firefighter (Iraq war veteran) because a male coworker assaulted her and Region 5 management protected him and tried to cover it up. In that moment, I thought, “If you only knew how many other women in similar circumstances you should be apologizing to Mr. Secretary.” But I think he does know.
Secretary Vilsack told us his “Cultural Transformation” was working. In fact, the meeting with the Secretary amounted pretty much to patting himself on the back for all the consultant reports, task groups and paper processing he’s accomplished in the name of Cultural Transformation. And still, qualified women continue to lose jobs to unqualified males. Women are erroneously labeled poor performers, trumped up on false disciplinary charges, denied training opportunities and details, harassed, undermined, and assaulted – all in the name of keeping the Forest Service status quo for men. The Coalition provided Secretary Vilsack, again, with ideas and a request to work in cooperation to resolve issues. He was non-responsive. His War on Women rages on.
President Obama, the Democrats are correct. There is a war on women. Unfortunately, the war is being perpetrated by your own administration. And, I believe this administration should avoid throwing stones lest its own glass house be shattered by a truth it refuses to acknowledge. A truth you became clearly aware of during the Shirley Sherrod fiasco.
March is Women’s History Month. In your Women’s History Month proclamation you stated, “While we have made great strides toward equality, we cannot rest until our mothers, sisters, and daughters assume their rightful place as full participants in a secure, prosperous, and just society.” We cannot rest Mr. President until your administration addresses the civil rights violations perpetrated against the women in the USDA, the Forest Service, and specifically Region 5. These women are our mothers, sisters and daughters.
Region 5 women are traveling to Washington D.C.for the week of May 20, 2012, to participate in the Federal Whistle Blower and Civil Rights demonstration and conference planned for May 21st and 22nd. We would like to meet with you or your staff some time during that week to discuss the issues identified in this letter. Please have your staff contact me at 530-365-3456 or Lawrence Lucas at 856-910-2399 to set up a date and time. We so look forward to speaking with you.
Sincerely,
Lesa L. Donnelly
Vice President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Cc: Senator Charles Grassley
Lawrence Lucas, President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Elaine Vercruysse, Lead Class Agent Vercruysse v. Vilsack
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, No Fear Coalition
Tanya Ward Jordan, The Coalition for Change
OccupyEPA.com
President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 2050
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA - March 31, 2012
Dear Mr. President
This is my third letter to you in less than a year discussing civil rights abuses against federally employed women in the USDA/Forest Service. I am writing to you again to ask for assistance because the “War on Women” is very real and being perpetrated against women in the Forest Service, particularly Region 5, California. Secretary Vilsack has been completely non-responsive to our communications and we must rely on you to help address this problem.
On May 19, 2011, we made you aware of multiple issues of sex and race discrimination, and egregious incidents of sexual and physical assaults. During May and June we had hope because Valerie Jarrett’s aide Michael Blake advised us that the Obama administration was concerned about our claims and he contacted the Department of Agriculture about them. Also, around that time, Secretary Vilsack pulled Civil Rights and Employee Relations authority from the Forest Service and placed it under Assistant Secretary Pearlie Reed, with full decision-making authority lying with his Deputy Assistant Secretary Robin Heard. Ms. Heard told me she had total delegated authority to act for the Secretary on Civil Rights and Employee Relations matters. Ms. Heard actually gave me her word, a promise, that she would “fix” the civil rights problems in Region 5. She was convincing and I believed her.
In July 2011, Robin Heard advised me that Secretary Vilsack cried when he was told about the sexual and physical assaults upon the women in Region 5. Ms. Heard said the Secretary was serious that the discrimination and abuse would be stopped. She and I communicated almost daily from June through September 2011. Per her request, I brought many women and minority employees forward to speak with her. Ms. Heard said she wanted to settle the Vercruysse Class Complaint, admitting there was a good old boy network that undermined merit-based hiring and promotions of women. Unfortunately, putting Pearlie Reed and Robin Heard in charge amounted to putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. Every woman I recommended to speak with her has been retaliated against, including unwarranted disciplinary actions and termination. Some of these women will be writing their own letters to you.
I don’t know if Secretary Vilsack really cried, but I do know that he has not stopped the civil rights abuses. And, while conditions worsen for many women and minorities his staff still refuses to work with The Coalition or make any attempts to settle the Vercruysse Class. The USDA’s War on Women rages on and the battle for their careers continues.
On September 29, 2011, I wrote to you again Mr. President advising that conditions for women were worse, particularly retaliation. I expressed my concern that millions of dollars were being needlessly wasted by the USDA due to their refusal to deal with the Vercruysse Class Complaint and the individual complainants. The administration’s War on Women raged on.
In October 2011, four female Region 5 employees and I flew from California to Washington, D.C. to participate in the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees’ Filibuster in front of USDA. We met with Secretary Vilsack. He personally apologized to one of our group. Secretary Vilsack apologized to a Hispanic female firefighter (Iraq war veteran) because a male coworker assaulted her and Region 5 management protected him and tried to cover it up. In that moment, I thought, “If you only knew how many other women in similar circumstances you should be apologizing to Mr. Secretary.” But I think he does know.
Secretary Vilsack told us his “Cultural Transformation” was working. In fact, the meeting with the Secretary amounted pretty much to patting himself on the back for all the consultant reports, task groups and paper processing he’s accomplished in the name of Cultural Transformation. And still, qualified women continue to lose jobs to unqualified males. Women are erroneously labeled poor performers, trumped up on false disciplinary charges, denied training opportunities and details, harassed, undermined, and assaulted – all in the name of keeping the Forest Service status quo for men. The Coalition provided Secretary Vilsack, again, with ideas and a request to work in cooperation to resolve issues. He was non-responsive. His War on Women rages on.
President Obama, the Democrats are correct. There is a war on women. Unfortunately, the war is being perpetrated by your own administration. And, I believe this administration should avoid throwing stones lest its own glass house be shattered by a truth it refuses to acknowledge. A truth you became clearly aware of during the Shirley Sherrod fiasco.
March is Women’s History Month. In your Women’s History Month proclamation you stated, “While we have made great strides toward equality, we cannot rest until our mothers, sisters, and daughters assume their rightful place as full participants in a secure, prosperous, and just society.” We cannot rest Mr. President until your administration addresses the civil rights violations perpetrated against the women in the USDA, the Forest Service, and specifically Region 5. These women are our mothers, sisters and daughters.
Region 5 women are traveling to Washington D.C.for the week of May 20, 2012, to participate in the Federal Whistle Blower and Civil Rights demonstration and conference planned for May 21st and 22nd. We would like to meet with you or your staff some time during that week to discuss the issues identified in this letter. Please have your staff contact me at 530-365-3456 or Lawrence Lucas at 856-910-2399 to set up a date and time. We so look forward to speaking with you.
Sincerely,
Lesa L. Donnelly
Vice President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Cc: Senator Charles Grassley
Lawrence Lucas, President, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Elaine Vercruysse, Lead Class Agent Vercruysse v. Vilsack
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, No Fear Coalition
Tanya Ward Jordan, The Coalition for Change
OccupyEPA.com
WH Distances Itself From EPA Administrator Who Would 'Crucify' Polluters -
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/white-house-says-epa-officials-crucify-comments-are-inaccurate/
Go to: OSC letter to President http://whsknox.blogs.com/covenant/
EPA and the PAP, PIP, POOF Performance Appraisal System April 20, 2012
by Susan M. Morris
A friend of mine called the EPA system of getting rid of employees under the Performance Appraisal Rating System (PARS) as the “PAP, PIP, and POOF" process. The manager or supervisor starts by deciding they want to get rid of an employee for some reason. No matter what the real reason, s/he will use“unsatisfactory” performance (Unsat). The employee may be sitting next to a“sleeper,” or a nonperformer, but that doesn't matter because the target is on their back and they have been selected for a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) or maybe a PAP, which is a precursor to the PIP. Usually, the manager will hold a meeting with his/her superior to let them know that they are going into the PIP process with an employee. After they agree, the manager will meet with a specialist in the Office of Human Resources (OHR) to assist them in putting together the PIP based on the employee’s functions and job duties. The lawyers (EPA has 1,000) will eventually be involved just to make sure that everything is covered legally to defend the agency if and when the employee files a grievance or complaint.
This system was used in the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) by the OCR Director so I was able to watch it in action. A senior fellow employee received a PAP and another lower-graded employee received a PIP. Of course, the next step was the POOF – and you’re out! Both of these employees retired – so management knows that the PAP, PIP, POOF system works. They are out of EPA no matter what the real reason and both had enough years (30-40) to retire. Some employees are not that fortunate, so their careers are about to be ruined using personnel regulations.
There is an outstanding Video on YouTube: Sklover Working Wisdom dated Jun 14, 2009 at www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu3sNKrNX4g. The 7-minute video gives you “6 Steps to Effectively Respond to a Performance Improvement Plan.” Sklover's preface states what we know about the performance appraisal rating system - that it is often being used to get rid of employees rather than to improve their performance. Some of the reasons he cited, other than unsatisfactory performance, were to reduce the workforce (women are at the forefront of this), retaliation, and discrimination. I would add that it is sometimes a combination since women and certain minorities, along with the disabled are more likely to be the first out.
I was involved in one PIP case that I will outline here for you, so you will know the system being used at EPA. The employee was told that she made a mistake at a conference. There was a contracting error and scheduling problem for which she was being held accountable, although she denied that she caused the mixup since she was not involved in either the contracting or scheduling. She also said that she immediately fixed the mishap so that it did not become a significant problem for OCR or the participants. But, what does the truth really have to do with it? She was blowing in the wind. Several participants contacted the headquarters to complain rather than contact her when she was there with them. They decided to go over her head because they could, knowing that their complaints would be welcomed. Eventually, the employee was put on a PIP that included the mishap, the disgruntled employees, and work that was not part of her job, but done two levels above her.
Fortunately, a manager assigned to rate theemployee’s progress did not do the necessary monitoring and evaluation before he retired. The employee’s rating was then where it should have been in the first place with her immediate supervisor. The employee's work, progress and accomplishments were rated in accordance with her PIP and she was rated Exceeds Expectations (EE) for the year. This certainly did not sit well with what management was trying to do. First, they ignored the supervisor’s EE rating as if it never occurred, extended the PIP into another period without consideration of the new standards, and got the previously “unassigned” work reassigned to the employee. Errors made in the process were totally ignored, but this did not seem to faze or concern anyone who was listening. As with most employees, management is counting on the employee throwing up their hands and giving up because it is just too much to endure. Many employees will just give up; some will retire if they can, and others will be fired or settle up with management to leave with a clean record. Some will file complaints of discrimination, waiting out the years going through the often untimely civil rights complaint process. EPA has a history of not processing either Title VI external or Title VII internal complaints timely (see the Deloitte Report on the OCR and my Rebuttal to that report).
I recently spoke with another EPA employee, who was put through the PIP and POOF process. His case is very similar to one above because the system is being used regularly and effectively by management. He has been through the internal EEO, then the EEOC, and the MSPB processes and is now awaiting his trial in U.S. District Court. As required, the administrative process must be “exhausted,” which is meant to protect employees and give an opportunity for resolution between the parties. But, what usually occurs is that the administrative process simply exhausts the employee emotionally, financially, and professionally. The internal system is generally drawn out, untimely and flawed; the EEOC process has been backlogged for years; and the MSPB system rarely finds in favor of employees. Knowing this, employees are driven through the system as far as they can and will go. The resolution rate for employee discrimination complaints at EPA is low, meaning when the employee enters the process they have to know that they will remain in it until the often bitter end as this employee who is at District Court.
First, the employee was determined to be a "problem.” Then he was told to carry out an assignment he never had before and without a clue as to how to accomplish it. Unfortunately, he admitted that he did not have the expertise or training to carry out the work. So, instead of the project being a small portion of his work, it then became a critical element. Management could then show that he could not do the work, which he already admitted he could not do, so that he could enter the Catch 22, PIP, POOF process.
Catch-22, a term that was coined in 1961 in Joseph Heller’s novel Catch-22, represents a situation in which an individual cannot avoid a problem because the rules placed on them are contradictory. Fixing one part of the problem often leads to another part of the problem that leads back to the initial problem. In the case of a PIP (if it is really not due to unsatisfactory performance), the manager puts together a plan for the employee’s improvement, when in actuality there is no real improvement possible. The employee works to improve their performance on an imaginary plan with goals that cannot be achieved. Therefore, no matter what the employee does, s/he are really back at the real reason for the PIP – to POOF.
After years of working in industry and the government, I have always been amazed at how easy and fast it is for management and employees to get around systems that have been put in place. The civil rights complaint process has been so distorted that it is hard to believe that it is to the benefit of employees. Just ask a lawyer to find you a loophole, which is something they can do easily enough, to contravene something without actually breaking the law. The loopholes in the civil rights process allows management to drag their feet, turn all their resources against the employee, and force them to be in the system for years, until they are emotionally and financially destroyed. The PAP, PIP and POOF system allows managers to go after employees for other than performance problems by using the system to demote or fire them while technically not breaking the law. The employee already had a target on their back and the arrows were aimed at them, so that it was always just a case of PAP, PIP, and POOF - you’re gone.
Anyone involved in something similar at EPA can write to this blog.
A friend of mine called the EPA system of getting rid of employees under the Performance Appraisal Rating System (PARS) as the “PAP, PIP, and POOF" process. The manager or supervisor starts by deciding they want to get rid of an employee for some reason. No matter what the real reason, s/he will use“unsatisfactory” performance (Unsat). The employee may be sitting next to a“sleeper,” or a nonperformer, but that doesn't matter because the target is on their back and they have been selected for a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) or maybe a PAP, which is a precursor to the PIP. Usually, the manager will hold a meeting with his/her superior to let them know that they are going into the PIP process with an employee. After they agree, the manager will meet with a specialist in the Office of Human Resources (OHR) to assist them in putting together the PIP based on the employee’s functions and job duties. The lawyers (EPA has 1,000) will eventually be involved just to make sure that everything is covered legally to defend the agency if and when the employee files a grievance or complaint.
This system was used in the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) by the OCR Director so I was able to watch it in action. A senior fellow employee received a PAP and another lower-graded employee received a PIP. Of course, the next step was the POOF – and you’re out! Both of these employees retired – so management knows that the PAP, PIP, POOF system works. They are out of EPA no matter what the real reason and both had enough years (30-40) to retire. Some employees are not that fortunate, so their careers are about to be ruined using personnel regulations.
There is an outstanding Video on YouTube: Sklover Working Wisdom dated Jun 14, 2009 at www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu3sNKrNX4g. The 7-minute video gives you “6 Steps to Effectively Respond to a Performance Improvement Plan.” Sklover's preface states what we know about the performance appraisal rating system - that it is often being used to get rid of employees rather than to improve their performance. Some of the reasons he cited, other than unsatisfactory performance, were to reduce the workforce (women are at the forefront of this), retaliation, and discrimination. I would add that it is sometimes a combination since women and certain minorities, along with the disabled are more likely to be the first out.
I was involved in one PIP case that I will outline here for you, so you will know the system being used at EPA. The employee was told that she made a mistake at a conference. There was a contracting error and scheduling problem for which she was being held accountable, although she denied that she caused the mixup since she was not involved in either the contracting or scheduling. She also said that she immediately fixed the mishap so that it did not become a significant problem for OCR or the participants. But, what does the truth really have to do with it? She was blowing in the wind. Several participants contacted the headquarters to complain rather than contact her when she was there with them. They decided to go over her head because they could, knowing that their complaints would be welcomed. Eventually, the employee was put on a PIP that included the mishap, the disgruntled employees, and work that was not part of her job, but done two levels above her.
Fortunately, a manager assigned to rate theemployee’s progress did not do the necessary monitoring and evaluation before he retired. The employee’s rating was then where it should have been in the first place with her immediate supervisor. The employee's work, progress and accomplishments were rated in accordance with her PIP and she was rated Exceeds Expectations (EE) for the year. This certainly did not sit well with what management was trying to do. First, they ignored the supervisor’s EE rating as if it never occurred, extended the PIP into another period without consideration of the new standards, and got the previously “unassigned” work reassigned to the employee. Errors made in the process were totally ignored, but this did not seem to faze or concern anyone who was listening. As with most employees, management is counting on the employee throwing up their hands and giving up because it is just too much to endure. Many employees will just give up; some will retire if they can, and others will be fired or settle up with management to leave with a clean record. Some will file complaints of discrimination, waiting out the years going through the often untimely civil rights complaint process. EPA has a history of not processing either Title VI external or Title VII internal complaints timely (see the Deloitte Report on the OCR and my Rebuttal to that report).
I recently spoke with another EPA employee, who was put through the PIP and POOF process. His case is very similar to one above because the system is being used regularly and effectively by management. He has been through the internal EEO, then the EEOC, and the MSPB processes and is now awaiting his trial in U.S. District Court. As required, the administrative process must be “exhausted,” which is meant to protect employees and give an opportunity for resolution between the parties. But, what usually occurs is that the administrative process simply exhausts the employee emotionally, financially, and professionally. The internal system is generally drawn out, untimely and flawed; the EEOC process has been backlogged for years; and the MSPB system rarely finds in favor of employees. Knowing this, employees are driven through the system as far as they can and will go. The resolution rate for employee discrimination complaints at EPA is low, meaning when the employee enters the process they have to know that they will remain in it until the often bitter end as this employee who is at District Court.
First, the employee was determined to be a "problem.” Then he was told to carry out an assignment he never had before and without a clue as to how to accomplish it. Unfortunately, he admitted that he did not have the expertise or training to carry out the work. So, instead of the project being a small portion of his work, it then became a critical element. Management could then show that he could not do the work, which he already admitted he could not do, so that he could enter the Catch 22, PIP, POOF process.
Catch-22, a term that was coined in 1961 in Joseph Heller’s novel Catch-22, represents a situation in which an individual cannot avoid a problem because the rules placed on them are contradictory. Fixing one part of the problem often leads to another part of the problem that leads back to the initial problem. In the case of a PIP (if it is really not due to unsatisfactory performance), the manager puts together a plan for the employee’s improvement, when in actuality there is no real improvement possible. The employee works to improve their performance on an imaginary plan with goals that cannot be achieved. Therefore, no matter what the employee does, s/he are really back at the real reason for the PIP – to POOF.
After years of working in industry and the government, I have always been amazed at how easy and fast it is for management and employees to get around systems that have been put in place. The civil rights complaint process has been so distorted that it is hard to believe that it is to the benefit of employees. Just ask a lawyer to find you a loophole, which is something they can do easily enough, to contravene something without actually breaking the law. The loopholes in the civil rights process allows management to drag their feet, turn all their resources against the employee, and force them to be in the system for years, until they are emotionally and financially destroyed. The PAP, PIP and POOF system allows managers to go after employees for other than performance problems by using the system to demote or fire them while technically not breaking the law. The employee already had a target on their back and the arrows were aimed at them, so that it was always just a case of PAP, PIP, and POOF - you’re gone.
Anyone involved in something similar at EPA can write to this blog.
Earth Day March and Protest against EPA - April 22-23, 2012 April 20, 2012
More marchers and protesters occupying the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C. outside the Administrator Lisa Jackson's office for Earth Day 2012. The numbers keep increasing as Americans become more incensed because their concerns for protection of the environment are being ignored. For more information, go to Facebook page and sign up in support. http://www.facebook.com/events/326669127357040/
In a article in The Wall Street Journal, yesterday entitled "States Mine Federal Funds Long After Need is Gone," by Damian Paletta, tells us that the University of Wyoming "needed an extra $10 million for renovations to its basketball arena last month," so the state legislators used a federal fund for cleaning up abandoned coal mines to do it. This money is being "forked" over by the U.S. Department of the Interior. A nice chart is available that shows Wyomining with $150 million, Pennsylvania with $67.2 million, West Virginia with $66.5 million, Kentucky with $47 million, and Illinois with $24.1 million. The extensive article is just one case of why our government is in such bad shape. Senator Mike Enzi said that, "Wyoming ought to get to do with the money what they want to do." I guess he believes that renovating a basketball arena is more important than the environment. "It's just like feeding time - feeding time at the zoo," said state Rep. Brnadine Craft, ....who voted against the basketball-arena project because she said that there are abandoned-mine projects in the city of Rock Springs that she feels are being overlooked." Be sure to read the entire article.
In a article in The Wall Street Journal, yesterday entitled "States Mine Federal Funds Long After Need is Gone," by Damian Paletta, tells us that the University of Wyoming "needed an extra $10 million for renovations to its basketball arena last month," so the state legislators used a federal fund for cleaning up abandoned coal mines to do it. This money is being "forked" over by the U.S. Department of the Interior. A nice chart is available that shows Wyomining with $150 million, Pennsylvania with $67.2 million, West Virginia with $66.5 million, Kentucky with $47 million, and Illinois with $24.1 million. The extensive article is just one case of why our government is in such bad shape. Senator Mike Enzi said that, "Wyoming ought to get to do with the money what they want to do." I guess he believes that renovating a basketball arena is more important than the environment. "It's just like feeding time - feeding time at the zoo," said state Rep. Brnadine Craft, ....who voted against the basketball-arena project because she said that there are abandoned-mine projects in the city of Rock Springs that she feels are being overlooked." Be sure to read the entire article.
Chemical Giant - N L Industries
An example of what we are faced with in this country would be the devastating impact on the environment created by N L Industries (formerly National Lead) when they entered the consumer market as manufacturers of titanium paints under the name "Dutch Boy." The little Dutch boy logo does not bring to mind the envronmental destruction
that occurred in New Jersey.
The company headquarters is in Houston, Texas, but a large paint-pigment manufacturing plant was located just over the Driscoll Bridge, more commonly known as the Edison Bridge, in Sayreville, New Jersey on a 427-acre site. The property owned by N L Industries is finally in the process of being "redeveloped" by O'Neill Properties, who bought the acreage for $82.7 million. After years of litigation with the chemical manufacturer and eminent domain by Sayreville in 2005, O'Neill bought the highly-contaminated site to develop it as a commercial multi-use site to be completed in 2013. The company will be bringing in soil to fill the land as part of the development.
The N L Industries factory on the site employed over 2,000 workers, mainly blue collar with a small white collar cadre
that included the Plant Manager's office, personnnel, health and safety office, contracting, and the union. When the wind blew and the whistle went off, employees were told to run for shelter, anywhere away from the chemicals that would be spewed in the air. Employee cars were parked under canopies, but eventually the paint came off from the airborne chemicals. Female employees were paid 50 cents for their nylon stockings that were ruined; men were paid for their ruined nylon shirts. Blue collar workers were not so lucky - they were often in accidents that resulted in serious injuries, particularly to their eyes. Whenever there was a union strike that shut down the plant, pizza pies were delivered by boat across the Raritan River to the workers who remained inside so that the picket lines did not have to be crossed. Numerous complaints were filed by people going south over the Edison Bridge to the Jersey Shore. To counteract the complaints, the factory increased production at night when the pollution was less visible and traffic over the bridge decreased. The land, air and water were contaminated by this chemical giant for years.
When N L Industries shut the plant down, the site just looked like an enormous abandoned area that you could view from the bridge, but the amount of contamination to the environment was not visible to most people. Residents who lived in the area, then noticed that a developer built a housing tract on the other side of the Raritan River from the chemical plant. The luxury model homes touted by the building created a joke among residents that only New Yorkers would buy the home because they
just didn't know the real story." Regarding the N L Industries purchase of the land and redevelopment, Randy Corman, Executive Director of the Sayreville Redevelopment Agency, said that the deal with N L Industries was "....not a perfect deal, but it's a real deal."
So - let's see if we have this straight. N L Industries polluted 427 acres in Sayreville, New Jersey and part of the Raritan River for years; abandoned the titanium dioxide site; held Sayreville residents hostage in contentious litigation for years; and then was paid almost $83 million to do it. How about placing a plaque on the upcoming tree-lined promenade being built on the Raritan waterfront that tells "the real deal."
that occurred in New Jersey.
The company headquarters is in Houston, Texas, but a large paint-pigment manufacturing plant was located just over the Driscoll Bridge, more commonly known as the Edison Bridge, in Sayreville, New Jersey on a 427-acre site. The property owned by N L Industries is finally in the process of being "redeveloped" by O'Neill Properties, who bought the acreage for $82.7 million. After years of litigation with the chemical manufacturer and eminent domain by Sayreville in 2005, O'Neill bought the highly-contaminated site to develop it as a commercial multi-use site to be completed in 2013. The company will be bringing in soil to fill the land as part of the development.
The N L Industries factory on the site employed over 2,000 workers, mainly blue collar with a small white collar cadre
that included the Plant Manager's office, personnnel, health and safety office, contracting, and the union. When the wind blew and the whistle went off, employees were told to run for shelter, anywhere away from the chemicals that would be spewed in the air. Employee cars were parked under canopies, but eventually the paint came off from the airborne chemicals. Female employees were paid 50 cents for their nylon stockings that were ruined; men were paid for their ruined nylon shirts. Blue collar workers were not so lucky - they were often in accidents that resulted in serious injuries, particularly to their eyes. Whenever there was a union strike that shut down the plant, pizza pies were delivered by boat across the Raritan River to the workers who remained inside so that the picket lines did not have to be crossed. Numerous complaints were filed by people going south over the Edison Bridge to the Jersey Shore. To counteract the complaints, the factory increased production at night when the pollution was less visible and traffic over the bridge decreased. The land, air and water were contaminated by this chemical giant for years.
When N L Industries shut the plant down, the site just looked like an enormous abandoned area that you could view from the bridge, but the amount of contamination to the environment was not visible to most people. Residents who lived in the area, then noticed that a developer built a housing tract on the other side of the Raritan River from the chemical plant. The luxury model homes touted by the building created a joke among residents that only New Yorkers would buy the home because they
just didn't know the real story." Regarding the N L Industries purchase of the land and redevelopment, Randy Corman, Executive Director of the Sayreville Redevelopment Agency, said that the deal with N L Industries was "....not a perfect deal, but it's a real deal."
So - let's see if we have this straight. N L Industries polluted 427 acres in Sayreville, New Jersey and part of the Raritan River for years; abandoned the titanium dioxide site; held Sayreville residents hostage in contentious litigation for years; and then was paid almost $83 million to do it. How about placing a plaque on the upcoming tree-lined promenade being built on the Raritan waterfront that tells "the real deal."
Bradley Manning Contingent at OccupyDOJ Protect - Tuesday, April 24, 2012
I'm hoping you can help promote the following events to DC/Baltimore area supporters: On April 24th, there will be a Bradley Manning Contingent at the Occupy the Department of Justice (DOJ) protest in Washington D.C
The DOJ is a leading collaborating agency involved in the prosecution of Bradley Manning. Learn more about the action and RSVP here.
On April 25th, there will be an all-day Vigil for Bradley Manning outside the maing gate of Ft. Meade (8am-5pm, Maryland 175 & Reece Rd, Fort Meade, MD 21113). We will be holding signs and banners outside the gate throughout the day, and supporters are encouraged to attend the courtroom proceedings.
In addition to the above two primary actions, we are calling for solidarity events around the world April 24-26th.
At the previous hearing on March 15th, Bradley’s lawyer filed a motion to dismiss all charges based on the government’s failure to present evidence as requested.
Our actions are planned to support this demand by pressuring public decision-makers. For more information and updates regarding the legal case and other issues
related to Bradley Manning, please check our website (www.bradleymanning.org) and/or e-mail me with questions (emma@bradleymanning.org).
Thank you for your support! In solidarity, Emma Cape, Campaign Organizer, www.bradleymanning.org - Join our facebook page: savebradley !
“God knows what happens now. Hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms… I want people to see the truth... because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.” -from Bradley's alleged chat with Adrian Lamo
The DOJ is a leading collaborating agency involved in the prosecution of Bradley Manning. Learn more about the action and RSVP here.
On April 25th, there will be an all-day Vigil for Bradley Manning outside the maing gate of Ft. Meade (8am-5pm, Maryland 175 & Reece Rd, Fort Meade, MD 21113). We will be holding signs and banners outside the gate throughout the day, and supporters are encouraged to attend the courtroom proceedings.
In addition to the above two primary actions, we are calling for solidarity events around the world April 24-26th.
At the previous hearing on March 15th, Bradley’s lawyer filed a motion to dismiss all charges based on the government’s failure to present evidence as requested.
Our actions are planned to support this demand by pressuring public decision-makers. For more information and updates regarding the legal case and other issues
related to Bradley Manning, please check our website (www.bradleymanning.org) and/or e-mail me with questions (emma@bradleymanning.org).
Thank you for your support! In solidarity, Emma Cape, Campaign Organizer, www.bradleymanning.org - Join our facebook page: savebradley !
“God knows what happens now. Hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms… I want people to see the truth... because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.” -from Bradley's alleged chat with Adrian Lamo
Just One of Monsanto's Crimes, Or Why We Can't Trust the EPA
By Alexis Baden-Mayer, Esq., Political Director, Organic Consumers Association, April 10, 2012
| monsantos_crimes__epa_coverup.pdf |
This article also shows how EPA goes after Whistleblowers without Even Flinching.....
As mentioned by MIT Professor in his video below for the march and rally against the EPA outside the offices of Administrator Lisa Jackson, he said that EPA has "a sordid history of discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers, and policies that harm the poor and communities of color, a record that led Congress to pass the No FEAR Act. The events are extensively documented by Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, who spear-headed the struggle, in her book, No FEAR. But, there is even more Whistle- blowing and discrimination at an agency than Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's case in which a jury awarded her compensatory damages in 2002, yet she is still fighting discrimination by EPA. "Mr. Ray Spears and Mr. Rafael DeLeon, who were involved in my first case, retaliated against me again years later. Instead of being held accountable by Administrator Jackson, she actually gave accolades to Mr. Spears before he retired and gave Mr. DeLeon the Office of Civil Rights Director's position," said Dr. Coleman-Adebayo. "Is there no moral compass at this agency at all?" she asked. "The senior management officials, lawyers, and their pals just dig in their heels and use taxpayer money to shut everyone up."
Susan Morris, another EPA whistleblower with findings against the agency by the Office of Special Counsel, said, "Where are the agencies and employees who are being funded and paid to protect and defend the complainants and whistleblowers? What is being done to the employees who are known to have violated the laws? What are President Obama and Lisa P. Jackson doing about this serious situation? I, and millions of Americans, did not expect this from the Obama Administration and we do not accept it. With the latest scandals at the General Services Administration and with Secret Service, I think it's time for them to turn this situation around because it gets any worse."
Susan Morris, another EPA whistleblower with findings against the agency by the Office of Special Counsel, said, "Where are the agencies and employees who are being funded and paid to protect and defend the complainants and whistleblowers? What is being done to the employees who are known to have violated the laws? What are President Obama and Lisa P. Jackson doing about this serious situation? I, and millions of Americans, did not expect this from the Obama Administration and we do not accept it. With the latest scandals at the General Services Administration and with Secret Service, I think it's time for them to turn this situation around because it gets any worse."
Occupy the Justice Department
The march against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) launched the American Spring against the corruption in Federal agencies and retaliation against Whistleblowers. Over 300 marched down 14th Street NW and Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC, chanting, "Hey-Hey, Ho-Ho, Lisa Jackson has to Go!" The Administrator of the EPA has a civil rights record that has continued throughout her tenure. At the rally in front of her office on 12th Street, Whistleblowers shouted because she has supported the Director of Civil Rights, Rafael DeLeon, and take actions against employees who protested the numerous violations. "The march was such a success because Americans are fed up with the misuse of their hard-earned money to fund corruption," said Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, an organizer of the March, with Susan Morris, both EPA Whistleblowers.
"The recent scandal at the General Services Administrator is only the tip of the iceberg," said Ms. Morris, a long-time civil rights professional. "I have worked at four major Federal departments after working for industry and then I unfortunately went to EPA thinking it would be a wonderful end to my outstanding career. My 9-year experience at EPA was something no one should endure and I will be working, no matter how long it takes, to make sure that women, minorities and people with disabilities do not have to suffer as I, and those I hired, did because of the corruption and retaliation that occurs in EPA. I am sorely disappointed that this administration has not come forward to protect the employees who save the taxpayers money by exposing the misuse of authority and public funds." In response to this administrations involvement, Morris said, "I believe, wiith the recent scandal at GSA, the President should step up to the plate and insist that the Whistleblowers, some whom have died from the humiliation and others who have been imprisoned, are exonerated, made whole and pardoned, if necessary. Or do we just support and pardon the 1% in this country, leaving the 99% to fend for themselves, ironically using our money as the major taxpayers to do it!" |
TUESDAY, APRIL 24th
The next big march and rally will take place at the Department of Justice and will be joined by Danny Glover, Frances Fox Piven, and others. As MIT Professor, Noam Chomsky, said in his video below, "We are the 99%.We have the chance to take our power back and to rescue the country, and the planet, from a grim fate." |
COMMENTARY:by Lawrence Lucas, President,
USDA Coalition Minority Employees The "intrusion challenge" has for years been an acute problem in the federal government, especially, at US Department of Agriculture (USDA) & the Environment Protection Agency (EPA). Congress in its infinite wisdom, chose to look the other way and failing miserably to conduct the proper civil rights oversight hearings of these rogue federal agencies. These agencies violate our laws and their ownpolicies, at the expense of others pain and suffering. This is especially true in the case of USDA, regarding USDA employees and our minority & women farmers of this nation. For the past four years we have made a host of appeals for civil rights oversight hearings of both the republican and democratic administrations. However, both continue to ignore these widespread abuses....mostly of women. The Shirley Sherrod example should tell America and the Congress something. The Obama administrations promises of "accountability", "open govern- ment", "transparency" and "working in cooperation & partnership" at these federal agencies, has become nothing more than a "pipe dream" for many of us. For these kinds of reasons, you had OccupyEPA, Whistleblowers, NOW groups, OccupyDC, environmentalist, civil rights groups, joining together in concert, rallying on the streets of WashingtonDC and in front of EPA on Friday of last week. Washington knows the problem....but does not have the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing. Chinese Water Torture Process by Susan M. Morris, Civil Rights Advocate & Professional
Just as the Chinese water torture process, in which water is slowly dripped onto a person's forehead and the victim is driven insane, the civil rights process slowly but surely tortures the victims of discrimination and retaliation. The civil rights systems and processes in place under the civil rights and whistleblowing laws and regulations, meant to protect Federal employees, have been overtaken by management officials and agency lawyers. Civil rights offices are often filled with non-professionals, something that has taken place for decades at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), enormous agency resources are used to defend the agency head and discriminating management officials, while water is slowly dripped onto the victims as the process is dragged out for years, with little hope of justice. The Washington, DC area, with all the Federal agencies represented, hundreds of thousands Federal employees and billions of dollars takes the torture of complainants to new heights. For many years I wondered if the civil rights systems and processes were intentionally or unintentionally broken. Most civil rights offices are understaffed, underfunded and under-suppported in comparison to other organizations, such as their counterparts in human resources. Personnel is where managers go to be assisted when they need to create a job, recruit, hire and take adverse actions against employees; the legal offices are where everyone goes to be defended, and the civil rights offices are where employees are supposed to go to get support and file complaints against managers for discrimination, harassment and retaliation. After working at EPA, I have decided that the failure of civil rights is intentional and will show that I did not come to that decision lightly. |
EEOC urged to tackle conflicts of interest in federal complaint processby Kellie Lunney
Agency attorneys interfering in the federal discrimination complaint process is still a major problem, government civil rights leaders said Thursday, urging the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to clarify its guidance on the issue this year. The Office of General Counsel in some agencies continues to intrude in the EEO complaint process during investigations, reviewing the affidavits of management officials involved in cases and vetting responses from witnesses before the formal hearing phase, said panelists at an event sponsored by the National Coalition for Equity in Public Service. The situation creates a conflict of interest in which an agency's legal counsel assists managers accused of discrimination or other wrongdoing by employees during the fact-finding portion of the complaint process. Not every general counsel is guilty of the "intrusion challenge," said Jorge Ponce, co-chairman of the Council of Federal Equal Employment Opportunity and Civil Rights Executives, but it's been a continuing problem in the executive and legislative branches since 2003, undermining the EEO complaint process. Management officials are getting free legal advice from the agency while employees who lodge complaints have to pay for their own lawyer if they choose to retain counsel, according to Ponce. "It's not fair," he said. "You are not going to eradicate discrimination if you are doing, or trying to do this. What you are trying to do is win at all costs." Jo Linda Johnson, EEOC's director of training and outreach division in the Office of Federal Operations, said such interference, including coaching witnesses and reviewing affidavits during fact-finding, was not appropriate. Johnson said guidance exists, but acknowledged it could be better. She said many EEOC officials are eager to release new and improved rules on maintaining independence during the complaint process, but an announcement is not imminent, although a draft document is circulating. EEOC Management Directive 110 states in part: "Heads of agencies must not permit intrusion on the investigations and deliberations of EEO complaints by agency representatives and offices responsible for defending the agency against EEO complaints. Maintaining distance between the fact-finding and defensive functions of the agency enhances the credibility of the EEO Office and the integrity of the EEO complaints process." There are two stages in the EEO complaint process: the informal or "pre-complaint" counseling phase and the formal hearing phase, where official government bodies adjudicate a case and render a decision. A 2009 report from the Government Accountability Office identified the intrusion issue as a growing problem, noting a "lack of independence concerning the potential conflict of having agencies conduct their own EEO complaint investigations and the undue influence of some agency legal counsel and human resources officials on the EEO process." The participation of agency counsel should be limited, said Ernest Hadley, president of the Federal Employment Law Training Group at Hadley law offices. It's appropriate for attorneys representing agencies to review documents or agreements involved in alternative dispute resolution, for example, but outside of that, "I see no role until there is a request for hearing," Hadley said. Ponce reiterated the need to clarify the rules on the issue sooner rather than later: "If you are going to have the general counsel manipulate the investigation, then what use do we have for EEO offices?" |
Occupy protesters, alpacas in tow, call for EPA administrator’s resignation March 31,2012
|
Occupy D.C. demonstrators back to target EPA March 31, 2012
|
||||
D.C.'s Newest Occupiers Are Fluffy, Furry and Flame-Retardant March 31, 2012
Hundreds March down 14th Street to Occupy EPA Headquarters March 31,2012 Alpaca marching down 14th St
Hundreds of Washingtonians, Federal workers, vacationers, visitors to the Cherry
Blossoms, and Occupy groups lined 14th Street NW, Washington, DC as over 300 OccupyEPA and NOW DC marchers chanted, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, Lisa Jackson has to go." The peaceful, but lively, protesters walked a mile from Franklin Square Park to the EPA Headquarters at 12th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue to make their demands known. Demands included EPA stopping their war against whistleblowers, Environmental Justice for Low-Income Communities being polluted, protecting the civil rights of Federal employees, protecting the people, the planet, not corporate profits, and justice for Trayvon Martin.  What's Going On?
A mother alpaca named Azriel, and her female 6-month old cria, led the way as hundreds of onlookers snapped pictures of this unusual sight going down 14th Street, Washington, DC. From the sidelines, they yelled to get the attention of the alpaca - many calling them llama, one of their camelid family members that is much larger that have pointed ears and often used as pack animals. The smaller alpaca, which are slightly harder to halter train and more skittish, were not happy with the rambuntious crowd with a huge world globe, drummers, chanters, singers and Snowflake the Polar Bear, insisted on moving to the front of the march. "Azriel and her daughter are Huacaya alpacas that are more abundant than Suri alpacas with long silky braids. They are native to the Andean Mountains and were first imported in 1984, but they have been domesticated for thousands of years. There are approximately 170,000 alpacas now registered in North America," said Vondell Carter, owner of Colonel Carter's Alpaca Farm in Virginia. His wife, Susan Morris, a cosponsor of the march with Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo said, "The pleasure of being with these gentle animals and their cria show you what is important in life and how critical it is to take care of our planet, our air, water, and land, which we all need to survive."
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, author of "No Fear, A Whistleblowers Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA," started the rally in front of the EPA Ariel Rios Building by calling for a moment of silence for Trayvon Martin and announcing the intention to continue protests against EPA. The first speaker, Dr. Helen Caldicott, a reknowned Australian physician, author and anti-nuclear advocate, gave a rousing speech, often pointing up to Administrator of EPA Lisa Jackson's office, cautioning Americans on the impact of nuclear weapons proliferation and damage to the planet. She was followed by a host of speakers who spoke about racial profiling, the lack of environmental justice for low-income communities, retaliation of whistleblowers at EPA and the Department of Energy, justice for the Black farmers, veteran's for peace, and harm being done to the environment because of corporate greed. A tape was released at the rally of the EPA Civil Rights Director, Rafael DeLeon, calling two former female EPA employees "Pink Elephants," and one the "EPA Rosa Parks." After hearing the tape, the demonstrators called for Mr. DeLeon's firing, along with Lisa Jackson's. "Lisa Jackson refused to consider the numerous complaints filed by women against Mr. DeLeon, his removal as the Director of Human Resources for violations, and his sexist statements on the national conference call after an investigation into the matter," said Dr. Coleman-Adebayo. "The National Whistleblower Center called for Mr. DeLeon's removal from the position, along with other organizations, to no avail. What does it take in this country for government officials to listen to the people?" Susan Morris, also an EPA whistleblower, repeated the promises made by President Obama and Joe Biden on their campaign trail in 2008, telling the crowd, "They said during their campaign that they were going to 'Shine the Light' on our government, along with defending whistleblowers from being retaliated against. The President said that he would protect whistleblowers because they are "often the best source of information about waste, fraud and abuse in the government and willing to speak out." He also said that "such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled." Morris then asked the protestors, "I'm a whistleblower with a finding from the Office of Special Counsel because EPA retaliated against me for exposing their violations of civil rights laws. Who is defending me? Who is defending Dr. Coleman-Adebayo another EPA Whistleblower?" Later in the program, Morris introduced Joe Carson, a Department of Energy whistleblower, who related his own trials and tributions for speaking out. Morris continued, "They need to shine the light on us and EPA, a microcosm of what is wrong with our goverment, where law breakers are just transferred so they can continue receiving their $170,000 year salaries after taking adverse actions against employees for exposing them. These management officials need to be held accountable for allowing employees to sleep on the job, play computer games, shop during government hours, not show up at work, while destroying people's lives. At the very least, they should be penalized for ignoring the President's promises and policies by retaliating against whistleblowers and accusing them falsely." Clouds over the rally and a slight drizzle of rain did not stop the protestors as the afternoon wore on and they made their concerns and demands known. An employee on the inside of the building, who wished to remain anonymous, said that they supported the demonstrators but were afraid to come to the windows for fear of retaliation. The crowd slowly dispersed after two hours with promises to continue their demonstrations throughout Washington, DC the entire month of April with NowDC and the American Spring. Schedules of planned activities, including Occupying the Department of Justice and Congress, can be found at www.NowDC.org 
Alpaca outside EPA HQ's
|
Noam Chomsky: "EPA has a sordid record of discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers..." Occupy EPA Protesters
"It is a privilege to be able to endorse the launching of the 2012 US occupation movement called the American Spring. As with the civil rights struggle, and other genuine popular movements, the American Spring provides all of us with an opportunity to become involved at the grassroots level
and to challenge the right of the 1% to destroy the earth, foreclose on our homes, and undermine the well-being of the poor and oppressed today and future generations.They are counting on our silence and apathy.We should not grant them that lethal gift. The Spring renewal of the Occupy Movement is being launched at the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a sordid history of discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers, and policies that harm the poor and communities of color, a record that led Congress to pass the No FEAR Act. The events are extensively documented by Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, who spear-headed the struggle, in her book, No FEAR. Over the past months, it has been impressive and heartening to see how people from all walks of life have joined the Occupy movement to engage in the struggle to free the country from corporate domination, government repression and subordination to private power. We should not stand idly by in the face of this assault on basic values and rights, and the renewed Occupy Movement provides a framework to resist and overcome, working in our own communities and beyond. We are the 99%.We have the chance to take our power back and to rescue the country, and the planet, from a grim fate. - We're Dying Here -
|
||
The American Spring: A Time for Occupy To Blossom March 2012
National Occupation of Washington, DC Will Bring Occupiers Together to Share Experiences, Educate Each Other and Build an Independent Movement to Shift Power from Concentrated Wealth
By Kevin Zeese
Many in the corporate media like to think the Occupy is over, but those of us involved know better. We do not rely on the corporate media to validate the work of Occupy, we see it in our communities. And, we know to look to our own
media for accurate information. The Occupied Wall Street Journal reports on the actions of the Occupy, it’s weekly
“Reports from the Front Lines” is something many of us look forward to so we can see the movement taking action across the country.
Another visible presence of Occupy will be evident this spring in Washington, DC when the National Occupation of
Washington, DC begins on March 30th. The event, which will continue through the month of April, is being organized by members of dozens of occupies from around the country. Twenty-five General Assemblies have passed statements of solidarity for this national occupy event.
NOW DC begins with a lot of activity. On the first day, Occupy the EPA, will bring people together to protect the planet for a sustainable future. It will feature Helen Caldicott, a pediatrician nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, known for her anti-nuclear activism, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo an EPA whistleblower and Margaret Flowers, also a pediatrician, noted for her advocacy for single payer health care among others. The march will include a pack of alpaca’s, a giant Earth and a giant polar bear puppet.
The weekend of March 31st and April 1st includes a two day “Bail Out America” direct action training organized by the Backbone Campaign which will provide information on strategies and tactics and developing creative actions that advance the causes of Occupy. Also that weekend will be the Occupation of the Department of Education, which will include teach-ins about how to end high stakes testing which is destroying schools and being used as a tool to privatize education. Finally, that weekend will include trainings for peace keepers who will help to ensure NOW DC remains non-violent in its challenges to the Washington, DC power structure.
While the first two weeks will primarily focus on the NOW DC Social Forum, there will be a housing protest on Monday, April 2nd seeking to reduce mortgages so they reflect the real value of housing, not housing bubble mortgages and a protest focused on student debt on April 3rd.
The first education event will be an all-day strategy conference “Control the Corporation” organized by the Center for the Study of Responsive Law which will feature experienced anti-corporate power crusaders speaking on countering the impact of corporations in elections, holding corporations accountable for their crimes, creating alternative economic models that provide jobs and increase wages, protecting the “commons” from the insatiable advocates of privatization, occupying the future and mobilizing for action.
The reminder of the week from April 3 to 5 and continuing on April 10 to 14 will be the NOW DC Social Forum. In-between those dates, there will be activities focused on spirituality, religion and activism to recognize the Passover and Easter holidays. The Social Forum will bring occupiers together to learn from each other and will be held at the historic Friends Meeting House on Florida Avenue near Dupont Circle. Occupiers from across the country have developed workshops on policiesand strategies to shift power from the 1% to 99%, lessons and the way forward for Occupy, direct action tactics and strategies, models for building alternative systems, occupy and labor and occupy faith.
On April 14th and 15th Occupy will celebrate at the OccuFest a music, arts and political free speech event that will be held at Meridian Hill Park, also known
as Malcolm X Park, on 16th Street, NW in DC’s Columbia Heights. Musicians are being brought together by occupiers from across the country as well as by Music for Occupy. There will be an occupy speak-out, spoken word, comedy, arts and politics also at the event.
The second half of the month will be primarily focused on protests, marches and civil resistance against the power structure in Washington, DC. This will not be limited to Congress but will include the corporate powers and lobbyists who dominate the government. On April 17th Occupy Congress is organizing “A17,” to protest Congress for consistently putting the interests of the 1% ahead of the people. Also planned is Occupy the Department of Justice on April 24th, which will protest mass incarceration, political prisoners, privatization of prisons and highlight the case of Mumia Al Jamal whose 57th birthday is the day of the protest.
Education will continue throughout the month with regular movie showings and educational events on or near Franklin Square Park, the center of NOW DC. In
addition, on April 28th, occupiers are encouraged to participate in the Drone Summit: Killing and Spying by Remove Control sponsored by CODE PINK, the Center for Constitutional Rights and Reprieve being held at the Mt. Vernon Place United Methodist Church. This will be followed by a strategy session on April 29th on how to deal
with this new form of warfare.
The goals of NOW DC are to elevate the skills, cohesion and vision of occupiers. People will be able to bring back new ideas, skills, strategies and tactics to their local Occupy. During the month of NOW DC conversations will be held to discuss next steps for the Occupy – where do we go from here?
The reality is, not only is the Occupy ongoing but it is just getting started. It is escalating its activities, building its skills and the best days of the movement to end the rule of the 1% are ahead of us.
Kevin Zeese was one of the original organizers of the Occupation of Washington, DC/October2011 and is an organizer with the National Occupation of Washington, DC.
By Kevin Zeese
Many in the corporate media like to think the Occupy is over, but those of us involved know better. We do not rely on the corporate media to validate the work of Occupy, we see it in our communities. And, we know to look to our own
media for accurate information. The Occupied Wall Street Journal reports on the actions of the Occupy, it’s weekly
“Reports from the Front Lines” is something many of us look forward to so we can see the movement taking action across the country.
Another visible presence of Occupy will be evident this spring in Washington, DC when the National Occupation of
Washington, DC begins on March 30th. The event, which will continue through the month of April, is being organized by members of dozens of occupies from around the country. Twenty-five General Assemblies have passed statements of solidarity for this national occupy event.
NOW DC begins with a lot of activity. On the first day, Occupy the EPA, will bring people together to protect the planet for a sustainable future. It will feature Helen Caldicott, a pediatrician nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, known for her anti-nuclear activism, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo an EPA whistleblower and Margaret Flowers, also a pediatrician, noted for her advocacy for single payer health care among others. The march will include a pack of alpaca’s, a giant Earth and a giant polar bear puppet.
The weekend of March 31st and April 1st includes a two day “Bail Out America” direct action training organized by the Backbone Campaign which will provide information on strategies and tactics and developing creative actions that advance the causes of Occupy. Also that weekend will be the Occupation of the Department of Education, which will include teach-ins about how to end high stakes testing which is destroying schools and being used as a tool to privatize education. Finally, that weekend will include trainings for peace keepers who will help to ensure NOW DC remains non-violent in its challenges to the Washington, DC power structure.
While the first two weeks will primarily focus on the NOW DC Social Forum, there will be a housing protest on Monday, April 2nd seeking to reduce mortgages so they reflect the real value of housing, not housing bubble mortgages and a protest focused on student debt on April 3rd.
The first education event will be an all-day strategy conference “Control the Corporation” organized by the Center for the Study of Responsive Law which will feature experienced anti-corporate power crusaders speaking on countering the impact of corporations in elections, holding corporations accountable for their crimes, creating alternative economic models that provide jobs and increase wages, protecting the “commons” from the insatiable advocates of privatization, occupying the future and mobilizing for action.
The reminder of the week from April 3 to 5 and continuing on April 10 to 14 will be the NOW DC Social Forum. In-between those dates, there will be activities focused on spirituality, religion and activism to recognize the Passover and Easter holidays. The Social Forum will bring occupiers together to learn from each other and will be held at the historic Friends Meeting House on Florida Avenue near Dupont Circle. Occupiers from across the country have developed workshops on policiesand strategies to shift power from the 1% to 99%, lessons and the way forward for Occupy, direct action tactics and strategies, models for building alternative systems, occupy and labor and occupy faith.
On April 14th and 15th Occupy will celebrate at the OccuFest a music, arts and political free speech event that will be held at Meridian Hill Park, also known
as Malcolm X Park, on 16th Street, NW in DC’s Columbia Heights. Musicians are being brought together by occupiers from across the country as well as by Music for Occupy. There will be an occupy speak-out, spoken word, comedy, arts and politics also at the event.
The second half of the month will be primarily focused on protests, marches and civil resistance against the power structure in Washington, DC. This will not be limited to Congress but will include the corporate powers and lobbyists who dominate the government. On April 17th Occupy Congress is organizing “A17,” to protest Congress for consistently putting the interests of the 1% ahead of the people. Also planned is Occupy the Department of Justice on April 24th, which will protest mass incarceration, political prisoners, privatization of prisons and highlight the case of Mumia Al Jamal whose 57th birthday is the day of the protest.
Education will continue throughout the month with regular movie showings and educational events on or near Franklin Square Park, the center of NOW DC. In
addition, on April 28th, occupiers are encouraged to participate in the Drone Summit: Killing and Spying by Remove Control sponsored by CODE PINK, the Center for Constitutional Rights and Reprieve being held at the Mt. Vernon Place United Methodist Church. This will be followed by a strategy session on April 29th on how to deal
with this new form of warfare.
The goals of NOW DC are to elevate the skills, cohesion and vision of occupiers. People will be able to bring back new ideas, skills, strategies and tactics to their local Occupy. During the month of NOW DC conversations will be held to discuss next steps for the Occupy – where do we go from here?
The reality is, not only is the Occupy ongoing but it is just getting started. It is escalating its activities, building its skills and the best days of the movement to end the rule of the 1% are ahead of us.
Kevin Zeese was one of the original organizers of the Occupation of Washington, DC/October2011 and is an organizer with the National Occupation of Washington, DC.
OccupyEPA Rallies for Whistleblowers! March 31, 2012
| occupyepa_rallies_for_whistleblowers__now_dc.mht |
EPA Tightens Security for Friday March 30th Peaceful Rally at Their HQs |
Owlish Surveillance at EPA for Rally & March |
||||
|
OccupyEPA March Flyer |
||||||
VOLUNTEERS - Call 240-731-9577 or 410-591-0892
|
|
RALLY at EPA HEADQUARTERS - FRIDAY, MARCH 30th, 2012
For Immediate Release
OccupyEPA
March 22, 2012
Washington, DC - The organizers of the OccupyEPA and NOW DC will gather at Franklin Square Park (13th and I Streets NW) at noon on Friday, March 30, 2012 and march down 12th Street NW across Pennsylvania Avenue to rally on the EPA Headquarters front lawn on 12th Street at l:00 pm (outside the Federal Triangle Metro stop).
Four demands of the group are to:
Stop the WAR on Whistleblowers; Stop POLLUTING Low-Income Communities
Protect the CIVIL RIGHTS of Federal Employees
Protect PEOPLE, the PLANET and NOT Corporate Profits, and
Justice for TRAYVON MARTIN
Noam Chomsky, professor MIT, American linguist, philosopher, historian and activitist, has thrown his full support behind the march and rally by endorsing the action with a promotional video asking people to come out and join the group. This is in light of the President's recent decision to go forward with building the southern portion of the Trans-Canadian Pipeline and emphasizes the importance of speaking out now to protect our planet so that our children can have a future. Joining the march is well-known environmental activist Ralph Nader. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, President of the "No Fear Institute" and author of "No Fear: A Whistleblowers Triumph Over Corruption at the EPA," and Susan Morris, civil rights activist and EPA Whistleblower, are Co-Chairs of the OccupyEPA march and movement. Speakers also include: Dr. Helen Calidcott, co-founder of "Physicians for Social Responsibility," an organization of 23,000 doctors committed to educating their colleagues about the dangers of nuclear power, weapons and war; Dr. Margaret Flowers, organizer of "OccupyWashingtonDC" and "NOW DC", a Congressional Fellow for Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), and a Board member of "Healthcare-Now". Kevin Zeese, a co-Director of "Fix Our Economy.US", attorney and long-time advocate on a broad range of social-economic-justice issues and on the steering committee of the "Bradley-Manning Support Network; Joe Carson, a Department of Energy Whistleblower and activist for justice; Alexis Baden-Mayer representing the "Organic Consumers Association"; Lisa Longo an activist against fracking; Lawrence Lucas, "U.S. Department of Agriculture Coalition of Minority Employees" and supporter of Black farmers; King Downing, attorney and representative of the "Human Rights-Racial Justice Center"; Patrick McCann, a representative from "Veteran's for Peace"; and a representative from the "Gray Panthers" and OccupyWashington, OccupyDC and OccupyEPA groups.
The presence of hundreds of people at the EPA on March 30th will send a clear message that the 99% are watching and are demanding that the EPA do it's job to protect people and the planet instead of corporate profits. Participants will carry signs telling the EPA why a sustainable future is important to them - for the lives of their children and future generations, for the beauty and diversity of plant and animal life, for clean air and water. The struggle of the 99% is a struggle for justice and for the very existence of human life on the planet. The EPA represents some of the worst policies put forth by the 1% - those that exploit people and the planet for greed and profit. We will not allow this practice to continue.
The organizers are asking families to join the march that will include live alpaca and "Snowflake the Polar Bear." There will also be music and entertainment.
