The EEOC and slow-walking responses by employers.

I mentioned about this one in the recent Obamaworld post.

I haven’t seen any confirmation in print, but I am wondering if “slow walking” isn’t becoming the new practice by employers who are visited with a discrimination charge.

The reason I’m saying it is because I’ve been following an IBM charge for close to two years. (October 2008). In all that time, IBM has managed, simply, not to respond. Well, not exactly. Their one response was to object to the test for a single employer, the one from Radio Union, which I also mentioned recently here. That was March 2009.

If a response to an administrative filing–which is what a discrimination charge is–can be slow walked, what good is the EEOC investigation apparatus? For the past 45 years, the investigative arm has been seen as a way to resolve incidents of discrimination (potential discrimination) without litigation.

That’s the whole thing! So many people–especially in big business–complain about litigation! But then, when a process has an alternative route, they refuse to cooperate! So which is it? Are we to conclude that big companies really just don’t want to be subject to any law that they don’t care to follow?

The EEOC is staffed with professionals who know the ins and outs of discrimination law much better than some 25-year-old law clerk to a federal judge. That’s who would be deciding your case if you wait the 6 months (after you file the required administrative charge anyway!) and then pull it into federal court. And if you ask for a jury, you have another roll of the dice.