BEFORE THE IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION

HOA THI BLOOD, Complainant,

VS.

HY-VEE FOOD STORES, CEDAR RAPIDS, and

HY-VEE FOOD STORES, CHARITON, IOWA, Respondents.

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND RULING ON REMAND CONCERNING THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ISSUE.

COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS

This matter originally came before the Iowa Civil Rights Commission on the amended Complaint filed by Hoa Thi Blood against Hy-Vee Food Stores alleging retaliation, as well as sex and national origin discrimination in employment. After a hearing was held on November 6, 1985, the Commission adopted, with modifications, the Hearing Officer's Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Ruling, Recommended Decision and Order by its Order of July 8, 1986. The Commission found that Hy-Vee did discriminate on the basis of national origin, in regard to promotion and assignment of working hours, and on the basis of sex in regard to promotion, both in violation of Iowa Code section 601A.6 (1983). The Commission also found that Hy-Vee did not retaliate against the Complainant and, therefore, was not in violation of Iowa Code section 601A.11 (1983). The Commission's decision finding national origin and sex discrimination was appealed to the Iowa District Court for Lucas County by Hy-Vee by Petition for Judicial Review. The District Court issued a Ruling on the Petition on April 29, 1988. Hy-Vee appealed the District Court's Ruling to the Supreme Court of Iowa.

On October 12, 1989, the Iowa Supreme Court issued an Order for Limited Remand to the District Court. This order states, in part:

One of the issues presented is whether the complainant filed her complaint within the time prescribed by Iowa Code section 601A ' 15(12). The appellant [Hy-Vee] raised this issue in its "Exceptions to Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Ruling, Recommended Decision, and Order" filed with the appellee [the Commission] on June 12,1986. The appellee did not address this issue in its order of July 8, 1986.

The issue involves a fact question and an interpretation of Iowa Code section 601A.15(12) as well as an interpretation of an administrative rule found in Iowa Administrative Code chapter 1613.3(2)(1988)(formerly Iowa Administrative Code Chapter 240-1.3(3)(6)). The district court made findings of fact and conclusions of law that should properly have been made by the appellee.

Hy-Vee Food Stores, Inc. v. Iowa Civil Rights Commission, No. 88-934, Order for Limited Remand at 1-2 (Iowa October 12, 1989)(emphasis added). The Iowa Supreme Court thereupon remanded the case to the district court with instructions requiring the district court to immediately remand the case to the Iowa Civil Rights Commission, in order for the Commission to resolve the statute of limitations issue, and setting a deadline for Commission action by November 14, 1989. Id. at 2.

Pursuant to these instructions, the Iowa District Court for Lucas County issued an Order of Remand on October 12, 1989 which states. in part:

1. This case is hereby remanded to the Iowa Civil Rights Commission for findings of fact, conclusions of law and ruling on the issue of whether complainant Hoa Thi Blood filed her complaint within the time prescribed by Iowa Code Section 601A.15(l2). The Iowa Civil Rights Commission shall give immediate priority attention to this matter and shall issue its findings, conclusions and ruling on an expedited basis.

2. The Iowa Civil Rights Commission shall certify its decision to the district court. The Iowa Civil Rights Commission shall file its certification in the office of the clerk of the Lucas County Iowa District Court in Chariton, Iowa, on or before November 14,1989. On the same day, the Commission shall deliver a copy of its certification to the undersigned Judge in Room 313 of the Polk County Courthouse in Des Moines, Iowa.

Hy-Vee Food Stores, Inc. v. Iowa Civil Rights Commission, Civil No. 21550, Order of Remand at 1-2 (Lucas County District Court October 12, 1989)(emphasis added).

On October 13,1989, Administrative Law Judge Donald Bohlken initiated a telephone conference call with Stephen Meyer, attorney for Hy-Vee, and Rick Autry, Assistant Attorney General, representing the Iowa Civil Rights Commission. Mr. Autry and Mr. Meyer agreed that, in lieu of submitting further briefs or making oral argument on the statute of limitations issue to the Administrative Law Judge, the Administrative Law Judge could rely on the briefs filed by the parties with the Iowa Supreme Court as well as the brief filed by Hy-Vee in support of its exceptions filed with the Commission.