After the complaint has been properly
filed, the next step is to notify the person or organization against whom
it was filed. Complaint notification is to be followed according to the
law by a "prompt investigation." The realities of the case load
and of staff (and funds) available control how soon an investigation of
the complaint is possible.
The scope of the investigation required by a particular complaint is influenced
by the specific situation. Sometimes the complaint alleges a simple act
such as the refusal to rent a motel room to a minority person. If investigation
reveals that no rooms were available and that the motel operator does, in
fact, rent rooms to minority persons, the resolution of the complaint is
a simple matter. However, discrimination and the investigation required
is almost never that simple. Because discrimination takes so many forms,
direct and indirect, an appropriate investigation may require the collection
of a large quantity of information. To illustrate what is required by the
brief phrase in the law--"shall make a prompt investigation thereof",
(601A.9.3 line 6 and 7), a number of summaries of investigations
undertaken during the past 19 months follows.
EXAMPLES OF INVESTIGATIONS
Employment - Religion
Allegation: Employee was required to work on Sunday, contrary to his religion.
Investigation: Complainant had been hired with the understanding that he
would not have to work on Sunday. Employer entered into partnership after
which the business remained open on Sunday. The Complainant's work schedule
was changed and he was threatened with loss of his job if he did not work
on Sunday. The investigation revealed that other employees without religious
conflicts were available to work on Sunday. (Successful conciliation was
attained. The Complainant's work schedule was revised and he did not lose
his job.)
Employment - Disability (White Male)
Allegation: Demotion because of disability.
Investigation: The investigation began by obtaining a description of the
duties from supervisors, and persons occupying the same type of job performed.
The Complainant had suffered a coronary six months prior to his demotion.
Investigation revealed that Complainant's doctor had released him as being
recovered and able to return to work. For four months prior to the demotion,
the Complainant did, in fact, retain and perform his old job. Fellow workers
who were interviewed were of the opinion that Complainant's effectiveness
in his work had not been lost. (Case pending further action.)
Housing - Race
Allegation: Because of race, the Complainant was unable to rent an apartment.
Investigation: The investigation involved interviews and examination of
records. The Complainant had made an appointment by phone to see a vacant
apartment. When Complainant met Respondent in person she was told there
were no vacancies in the apartment complex. The apartment house records
were examined and revealed that comparable apartments were, in fact, available
and the comparable apartments were rented to Caucasians after the Complainant
had been rejected and further, that the Respondent continued to advertise
vacancies. (Settlement pending.)
Employment - Race and Sex in Recruitment, Hiring, Promotion, Conditions and Privileges of Employment
Allegation: the Employer discriminates on the basis of race and sex in personnel
systems.
Investigation: A detailed interrogatory was submitted to the Respondent. The completed form was examined in detail to determine among other things: the recruitment methods and sources in use; the sex and race characteristics of the workforce, overall and in each job category or job title; the promotion pattern with respect to sex and race; the pay system; the fringe benefit systems and other policies such as maternity and sick leave. Interviews were conducted with persons holding employee selection or supervisory responsibility to detect discriminatory attitudes and biases and to provide further details with respect to information in the interrogatory. (Conciliation pending.)
Public Accommodation - Race
Allegation: Complainant alleged that a Municipal Board of Trustees failed
to allow his group to use a Public Accommodation because of his race.
Result: The Complaint was served on Respondent. The Respondent's representative
had based the refusal to rent on his personal assumption that the group
might become "boisterous or rowdy." The normal operation of the
auditorium was to rent it on a first come, first served basis for a fee.
Service of the Complaint caused the Management to rent to the group and
the case was closed, following later investigatory inquiry, as being "satisfactorily
adjusted."
The Commission rules include a number of categories of case closures. The
last of the cases summarizing investigations demonstrated that the service
of a Complaint alone may cause a change in a discriminatory policy or practice,
which is the purpose of the law. Because of the backlog of cases, investigation
may begin a considerable length of time after the alleged act or acts occurred
and the Complaint is received and served. The investigatory procedure may
reveal that the Complainant wishes to withdraw the case, and indicates that
desire in writing at which time the case is closed. "Satisfactorily
adjusted" means that the Complainant has indicated in writing that
the Complaint has been resolved to his or her satisfaction.
In situations such as those in which a Complainant cannot be located or
the Respondent has gone out of business, a case may be "administratively
closed" because, in the opinion of the investigating Commissioner,
no useful purpose would be served by continued actions.
Sometimes a cursory examination of a complaint which is received will serve
to show that the Commission has no jurisdiction under the law. Organizations
which employ less than four people are not covered, but because the number
of employees may not appear on the complaint, at least a preliminary investigation
will be required to ascertain that fact. Complaints may be closed because
of lack of jurisdiction at each and every step of the process. (Note other
examples of investigation work in case examples in following sections.)
A written report of the investigation is prepared by the staff.
Closures which do not require "Cause" findings:
102 - Cases Withdrawn
38 - No Jursidiction
118 - Administrative Closures
36 - Satisfactorily Adjusted
_______________________
294
(120 matters received were not docketed as cases because of a lack of jurisdiction.
Not counted in total cases received.)