GovernmentExecutive.com

Federal employee minority groups convened a town hall meeting earlier this week to decry recently proposed regulations for implementing a 2002 anti-discrimination law.

The groups said the regulations suggested by the Office of Personnel Management are too weak because they allow federal managers to orally reprimand those who have violated the Notification and Federal Employee Anti-Discrimination and Retaliation (No FEAR) Act.

"This rule is really an affront to all of us, to think that they would slip under the door a verbal reprimand," said Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, a senior policy analyst at the Environmental Protection Agency and one of the driving forces behind the No FEAR Act.

OPM's Jan. 25 proposed regulations state that the agency is "considering expanding the range of disciplinary actions reported to include unwritten actions such as oral admonishments."

Oral reprimands are an insufficient response to cases of discrimination, groups participating in the town hall meeting said in a statement.

"The issuance of oral reprimands for civil rights violations is in sharp contrast to the traditional written reprimands or firing for serious offenses," the statement said. "The OPM proposal would allow managers to escape genuine punishment and send precisely the wrong message of tolerance and no accountability."

OPM extended the period for comments on the proposed regulations from mid-March to May 1 in response to requests from the No FEAR coalition and members of Congress.

"OPM is seeking input from the public on expanding the definition of discipline to a broader reach, including unwritten actions such as oral reprimands," said Kathie Whipple, the personnel agency's acting general counsel, in a statement. "We have provided an extended comment period in part for this reason."

People wishing to comment are encouraged to e-mail their thoughts to nofear@opm.gov, Whipple said.

Matthew Fogg, a vice president of Blacks in Government, said the regulations backpedal from a victory his group thought it won in 2002. "When the bill passed, we ... believed that we were making a difference," he said.

Fogg said oral reprimands devalue the spirit of this legislation, and also undermine employees' ability to have a clear paper trail to use if they decide to take legal action.

The No FEAR act requires agencies to keep close tally on the number of civil rights violations.

In a sample letter produced in reaction to the OPM regulations, the No FEAR coalition also said including oral admonishments in this count will make it less credible by misrepresenting "the disciplinary actions taken by agencies and [inflating] the actual number of credible punitive measures used to discourage and eliminate discrimination and retaliation."

COMMENTS

• It is too bad that the United States has to have any type of discrimination law. I took part in the 1964-1965 "opening" of Mississippi and Alabama concerning voting rights and non-discrimination in public facilities. I guarantee you that a discrimination law that is enforceable with a verbal reprimand is nothing at all! We didn't risk our lives to get the government to give verbal reprimands for discrimination. Those who discriminate should be prosecuted and thrown in jail and fined extensively! You want freedom, non-discrimination is part of the price and powerful enforcement of discrimination laws is part of the cost of freedom. Fight this feeble-minded proposal of government and stand up for freedom for all American citizens - not illegals. Taxpayer Posted May 3, 2006 7:27 AM
• It only makes sense to take the punishment for violation of anti-discrimination laws to a verbal reprimand. Would you want to be a manager in an agency that has a de facto but not legal affirmative action system to be held responsible for the "reverse" discrimination? Could you imagine the liability that managers would have if and when the outstanding scholar program is shown for the anti-white program that it is? How often do you see a minority or female promoted just to make the numbers look better? I do not think that federal agencies would want to make themselves legal and actually put affirmative action plans into existence (you sort of have to admit to discrimination first)? Be happy the way things are. GovExec.com reader Posted May 2, 2006 7:23 AM