- By Judi Hasson
- Aug 28, 2000
Pity the federal worker who files a discrimination complaint with the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission. With any luck, it will take four years
or more to get a ruling on the case.
But things may be changing soon for federal employees and the EEOC.
If a federal task force has its way, there will be no more complaints filed
on paper. No more lost files. No more incomplete cases or delayed decisions.
But some worry that this may mean sacrificing privacy for improved efficiency.
An interagency task force of representatives from the EEOC and the National
Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR), plans to release a report
this fall on how federal agencies can make their complaint systems more
effective. And among its antici-pated suggestions is a centralized database
at the EEOC to track discrimination cases that are now tracked on paper.
The database is also expected to require specific information for every
complaint and a secure line to transmit the data in real time.
The recommendation is a response to criticism from the General Accounting
Office that the EEOC is incapable of quickly resolving disputes and unable
even to tell Congress exactly how many cases are pending at any given time.
Last year, the EEOC received 21,868 bias complaints. It was the first
year the agency had tracked the number of complaints. No other data is available
because the EEOC is running two years behind in compiling its numbers the
old-fashioned way — by hand.
"If you are going to find systematic problems, you have to have the
right data," said Karen Freeman, co-chairwoman of the NPR/EEOC Interagency
Federal EEO Task Force.
But the idea of a centralized system is setting off alarms among organizations
that represent federal managers.
"Collecting extensive information on each and every case that is filed,
and compiling it into a single database, would likely result in the single
largest federal database on a specific group of citizens ever developed,"
said Carol Bonosaro, president of the Senior Executives Association, which
represents top-level government employees.
"We don't question their intent for a minute, but stuff happens," she
continued. "Databases are not always as secure as we would wish, and that
information becomes available whether intentionally or unintentionally."
Bill Bransford, who often represents federal managers and executives
as a partner at the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Shaw, Bransford, Veilleux
& Roth, agreed.
"There's nothing wrong with holding a manager responsible,"
Bransford said. "The problem is, it's going to be available at every EEO
office throughout the government and widely disseminated."
There is no plan to gather information to track individuals, the EEOC
maintained."We would never do anything to jeopardize the privacy rights
of an employee," said Carlton Hadden, acting director of the EEOC's Office
of Federal Operations. "There needs to be some central data system so we
know what is happening in the federal government."
Privacy think tanks, including the Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC), say the dispute is one of many erupting throughout government as
it tries to create large databases that can be hacked or potentially opened
up to the public.
"With databases, you have to be careful the information is going to
be protected" and not used inappropriately, said Sarah Andrews, policy analyst
at EPIC. "So that means it's not only secure against unauthorized access
and use, but it is also kept up-to-date and accurate."
Hadden pointed to the interface between the EEOC and state and local
governments to demonstrate that there is already a safety valve in place.
Although local agencies gather data for the EEOC, "someone in Fairfax County,
[Va.], could not access the data available to the EEOC staff," he said.
"These complaints are so far removed from where we are trying to go, and
that is using the technology more efficiently and effectively."