COURT VIEWS EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACT BROADLY

Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP73B00296R000400100021-4
Release Decision:
RIPPUB
Original Classification:
K
Document Page Count:
48
Document Creation Date:
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date:
August 17, 2001
Sequence Number:
21
Case Number:
Publication Date:
May 14, 1974
Content Type:
NSPR
File:
AttachmentSize
8.3 MB
Body:
Os"-- 0 0 0 0 - THE EVENING STAR and DAILY NEWS Washington, D. C., Monday, May 14, 1973 0 Craikier's 9 to 4:30 Coburt Views Equal Opportunity Act Broadly 0400100021-4 < BY JOHN CRAMER u Star?News Stalt writer ?A recent decision by a S. district court here, V?st of its kind under the "2 Equal Opportunity t, which gave federal rkers easier access to urts in job discrimina- tinarn cases, will be good c istws to some minority .4goup employes in govern- tent. lliarch 24, 1972, effective tite. 'LLIt further held that it "wakes no difference tether the appeals were 'Rending before the Civil Service Commission or at level. off the job for several seit on thinnich The decision was won y attorney Wilhelmina Jack- son on behalf of Dr. Dollie Walker of Baltimore, a GS-14 ($25,620) social worker in Justice Department's Community Relations Service. It was her second victory on Dr. Walker's behalf. Earlier. ? as was report- ed here in January ? Civil Service Commission's _Board of Appeals and Re- view ordered Dr. Walker restored to duty after. Jus- tice fired her, and kept her charges which just stand up on appeal. was fired ? but was frirrari tn nh nrInn thnt THE COURT ordered Trictir-o In rennnnirler T1r Committee, slow to grab the ball, probably will act This would lessen the impact of coming June just a great big intake, involving employ 4ver- re- turning from ov rseas have the right to ing back, at governme ex- pense, the same up 11,- 000 pounds of hou old goods they took v. i em. Families of deceas em- ployes have that ri too. That's been the for years. Despite A's strange announc: 'ent, nothing has been 'wed, its officials say. 0 Not for the livi not for the dead. 0 n t posi ion w e ordered her restored. Justice then was left with essentially only one argument to the court: That the 1972 act was not intended to be retroactive. Judge John 1..ewis Smith Jr., held to tlie contrary, construing.4e act as a remedial statine applying "to all cases pending at the time of it enactment unless some sted right would be impaired as a result." BUT EARLIER still, on July 20, 1971, Dr. Walker, who has degrees from Iowa, Minnesota and Pennsylvania, had filed a discrimination complaint charging she had been denied promotion because of her race and sex. Justice, supported by the Board of Appeals and Review, threw out that complaint on grounds it no longer was valid after she a er s comp am un .e tis own anti-discrimination procedures. Her problems aren't over yet. Community Rela- tions Service is in the midst of a major personnel cutback, and she's been served with a layoff no- tice, to take effect in early June. Obviously, there'll be a sequel. Read about it here later. RETIREE BILL ? The Senate Civil Service approved bill offering ear- ly retirement to older fed- eral employes w hose agen- cies find themselves in "major" layoffs. When such layoffs oc- cur, it would let those at least 40 years old and with 20 years of service, or those with 25 years of service regardless of age, retire on immediate Civil Service annuities ? re- duced by 2 percent for each year of age under 55. I PROMISED to obtain General Services Administration's explana- tion of an intriguing new change in GSA travel ex- pense rules for federal employes, which was an- nounced this way: "Expenses for shipment of household goods for deceased employes at the same level paid living employes." Well, it turns out it was CPYRGHT NEW 140111vattglEaRelease 2001/08/28)XIDERD 03t3 oFonam 00112PAJ3E ? JOBS RIGHTS BILL VOTED AS SEW ? ENDS FILIBUSTER Measure Let! Federal Unit Ask Courts to Order Halt In Bias in Employment WEAKENING MOVES FAIL Debate Cut Off on,a Tally of 73,21 Before Legislition cPYRGHT Wins liassage-73fr By DAVID E. R special to The New Tefetr - WA.3I TON, gib Atter five week? Of dehafe",-the Senate broke a 'South:nil-TM- buster today and passed legisla- ?-tian giving the Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission power to move against job dis- erimination. ? The measure would allow the commission to ask Federal courts to order employers cu unions to stop discriminating The bill, which has been be- fore the Senate since It con- Vened Jan. 16, now goes to the House, which passed a similar measure 'last year. 'The House could adopt the Senate bill di- rectly, but more than likely it will send the legislation to a conference of the two houses. Shortly after noon today, the Senate voted, 73 to 21, to in- voke closure; or cut Short de- bate, on the civil rights bill. Then, "after defeating several. a nifffriSiOISMIhe legisla- ?, thegenate Paged the bill by a vote af'73 to 16 and then in a PrOdduraI vote of 72 to 17. jurisdiction Is Vairenid- For the first time, eirrefett- i.ire would place the- Natal Government, state CIS load governments and eddcation'al institutions within the crtutt sion's purview. CPYR.oHT irrn Ant Op. portimity Commission was cre- OssUL the Civil Rights Act reJer gullt Ar part of the compromise that led to the passage of that landmark legis- lation, the commission was left without enforcement powers. It can receive complaints about job discrimination and attempt to persaade the em- ployer or union involved to end the practice. But if volun- tary conciliation fails, the com- mission is powerless. The measure adopted by the Senate today would permit the commission to file suit in Fed- eral court against employers or unions that it believed were discriminating on the basis of sex, race Or religion. 114111 commission believed a case was In "the general tftsl Interest,? it could ask case be heard by a three-judge panel, with the line }Billed by N.A.A.C.P. Aide islation that was passed t ofie 6f the last of eseries of cfvU'rights meas- ures that IDe-gart *ftli the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964 and continued through the Vot- ing Rights Act of 1965 and the Open Housing Act of 1968. Clarence Mitchell, head of the Washington office of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, who has been the chief lobby- ist on all these civil rights mesaures, said after the vote today that the Senate's bill would provide "a very effective Instrument for fighting dis- crimination in employment." Today, closure was adopted with 10 votes to spare. Including state and local governments in the commis- sion's jurisdiction was especial- ly odious to such Southerners as Sam 3. Evin Jr., Democrat of North Carolina, who de- clared it a violation of states' rights. Role of Attorney General "Mk jirnvision would allow pretne Court. This procedure is aimed to speed important discrimination cases through the courts. The legislation, which is sup- ported by the Nixon Adminis- tration, represents a middle ground between Senate liberals, who wanted to give the com- mission power to issue cease- and-desist orders against com- panies and unions that dis- criminated, and Southerners, who believed the commission should have no enforcement authority. The liberals, who were backed 'by organized labor, civil rights groups and women's rights organizations, were ap- parently successful three weeks ago in locking into the bill language that would have al- lowed the commission to order employers to stop discrimina- tion. But, with this provision in the bill, the liberals could not muster the two-thirds major- ity necessary to end the South- erners' dealaying tactics, and two atimmpts to invoke closure failed by 9 and 6 votes, respec- tively. tile commission, fu, to delve into discrimination in police and fire departments. In the case of state and local governments, the commission could not, under the bill, take discrimination cases directly to court but would have to refer them to the Attorney General, who could initiate court action. The bill would also allow the commission to move against companies with as few as 15 employes and unions represent- ing only 15 workers. At present, there must be at least 25 em- ployes or members before a company or union falls under the commission's jurisdiction. The bill the House passed last year does not extend the commission's jurisdiction to governments and educational institutions, nor does it lower the minimum size of the com- panies and unions covered. The House bill, furthermore, prohibits the commission from bringing class-action suits on behalf of large groups of work- ers, while the Senate measure contains no such prohibition. Approved For Release 2001/08/28: CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved FotatilmitAIMOAVikt@INWP7?EQAMR00040014N240y 22, 1972 S2298 proach which would have enabled EEOC to conduct administrative hearings and issue judicially enforceable cease-and- desist orders. We. debated this issue for 4 weeks. We had a number of votes on the subject. The final vote came last Tuesday, on an amendment offered by the Senator from Colorado (Mr. DOMINICK) . That amendment provided an enforcement mechanism which would allow the Equal Employment Opportu- nity Commission to seek injunctive relief in the Federal district courts for charges of unlawful employment practices. Mr. President, I vigorously opposed that method of enforcement because I felt that it would lead to unwarranted delays in the Federal courts and would not provide the kind of agency expertise and guidance needed in employment dis- crimination cases. However, Mr. Presi- dent, the Senate made its judgment. I fully recognize, as I have stated on sev- eral occasions, that the enforcement mechanism that was so stanchly ad- vocated by the distinguished Senator from Colorado was a workable mech- anism. It was not a negative approach to this law. It was a positive effort. I commend him for his diligence. Al- though I strongly prefer the admin- istrative mechanism, I think that the court enforcement mechanism can work. However, it can only work if Congress provides the commission and the courts with the resources that are going to be necessary to make that program work. Second, as to coverage. The bill will extend the coverage to three classes of employees. It will assure to employees of State and local governments the protec- tions of title VII of the Civil Rights Act. It does so, with one proviso, which ex- empts from coverage the elected officials and their most pers6nal advisers. I be- lieve that the coverage of governmental employees is a monumentally important step for the cause of equal employment opportunity. It was a hotly contested Issue. I am gratified that the Senate, by an overwhelming vote of 59 to 16, took this historical opportunity to assure a protective mechanism for the more than 10 million workers employed in such ca- pacities. The bill also extends coverage to mil- lions of teachers in our educational sys- tem by eliminating the present exemp- tion for employees of those institutions. It goes without saying that the opportu- nity to become a teacher in our society Is one that should be cherished and val- ued. Arbitrary and artificial restraints, which deny that opportunity, must be abolished. Inclusion of teachers, in this bill, is a major step toward obtaining that goal. Finally, coverage is extended to em- ployers with 15 or more employees and unions with 15 or more members instead of 25 or more. This figure represented a compromise between those of us who ad- vocated coverage of employers and un- ions with even fewer employees and members and those who were concerned with the impact of additional federal regulations on smaller businessmen. I think it is clear that no one really dis- putes the need for equal employment op- portunity at every level of our society. I do not believe that those who were ad- vocating higher levels of coverage were suggesting that small businessmen or unions should be engaged in discrim- ination on the basis of race, color, re- ligion, sex, or national origin. I think, however, that there was a concern about the ability of the commission to digest the new coverage that we are providing. I think, therefore, that the 15 level will be a useful and workable device and the extension of coverage in the future can be reconsidered at an appropriate time. Another significant part of the bill and one that has not had very much debate because it was so clearly accepted at the committee level, concerns our Federal Government employees. The requirement of equal employment opportunity is ex- tended by statute to these employees, and for the first time a clear remedy is provided enabling them to pursue their claims in the district courts following a Civil Service Commission or agency hearing. Moreover, and very importantly, the Civil Service Commission is given addi- tional responsibilities to see that job dis- crimination in the Federal service is brought to a halt. I cannot emphasize the concern that was expressed in our com- mittee over the need to have the Federal Government as the model employer. Pro- vision for a noncontroversial method is due to the extensive efforts of the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Domnsucx) and the Senator from California (Mr. CRANSTON) , and the good faith and desire for' im- provement and change reflected on the part of the Civil Service Commission dur- ing our committee consideration of this matter. Lastly, the bill makes a number of modifications in the administrative op- eration of EEOC. This includes the very important provisions for deferral of cases to State agencies, modification of the recordkeeping and investigative author- ity of the commission and other similar housekeeping changes. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that a section-by-section explana- tion of the scope of the bill that I have prepared be printed in the RECORD at the end of my remarks. I firmly believe that we have a good bill before us. I believe this legislation is long overdue. I hope that we can look forward to its enactment in the very near future. There being no objection, the analysis was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, r? follows: SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF S. 2515, THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ACT OF 1972 The following analysis seeks to explain the major provisions of S. 2515, the Equal Em- ployment Opportunities Act of 1972, as amended by the Senate during its debate on the bill. These explanations, which reflect the changes adopted by the Senate from the original bill as reported by the Committee, encompass the enforcement provisions of Title VII as now adopted by the Senate and the various procedural and jurisdictional changes which are also encompassed the within provisions of S. 2515. In any area where the new law does not address itself, or in any areas where a specific contrary intention is not indicated, it is assumed that the present case law as devel- oped by the courts shall continue to deter- mine the applicability of Title VU. It is also the intent of this legislation to remedy defi- ciencies in the current law. SECT/ON 2 This section amends certain definitions contained in section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 701(a)?This subsection defines "person" as used in Title VII. Under the pro- visions of 5. 2515, the term is now expanded to include State and local governments, gov- ernmental agencies, and political subdivi- sions. Section 701(b)?This subsection defines the term "employer" as used in Title VII. This subsection would now include, within the meaning of the term "employer", all State and local governments, governmental agen- cies, and political subdivisions, and the Dis- trict of Columbia departments or agencies (except those subject by statute to the procedures of the Federal competitive serv- ice as defined in 5 U.S.C. I 2102, who along with all other Federal employees would now be covered by section 717 of the Act). This subsection would extend coverage of the term "employer", one year after enact- ment, to those employers with 15 or more employees. The standard for determining the number of employees of an employer, i.e. "employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year," would apply im- mediately upon enactment to all employers of 25 or more employees during the first year, as well as to the final coverage of 15 or more employees thereafter. Section 701(c)?This subsection elimi- nates the exemption for agencies of the United States, States, or the political sub- divisions of States from the definition of "employment agency" in order to conform with the expanded coverage of State and local governments in section 701 (a) and (b) above, State agencies, previously covered by reference to the United States Employment Service, continue to be covered as employ- ment agencies. Section 701(e)?This subsection is revised to include labor organizations with 15 or more members within the coverage of Title VII, one year after the enactment of the present bill. Section 701(1)?This subsection is in- tended to exclude from the definition of "employee" as used in Title VII those per- sons elected to public office in any State or political subdivision of any State by the qualified voters of such State or political subdivision. An additional exemption from the definition of "employee" is also provided for persons chosen by such officers as personal assistants or as immediate advisors in re- spect to the exercise of the Constitutional or legal powers of the office held by such elected officer. This exemption is intended to be read very narrowly and is in no way in- tended to establish an overall narrowing of the expanded coverage of State and local governmental employees as set forth in sec- tion 701(a) and (b) above. Section .701(j)?This subsection, which is new, defines "religion" to include all aspects of religious observance, practive and belief, so as to prohibit discrimination against em- ployees whose "religion" requires obser- vances, practices and beliefs which differ from the employer's or potential employer's norm. Discrimination on this basis would be unlawful unless an employer can demon- strate that he cannot reasonably accomodate beliefs without undue hardship on the con- duct of his business. SECTION 3 This section amends the exemptions al- lowed in section 702 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 702?This section is amended to eliminate the exemption for employees of educational institutions. Under the pro- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 With the aPPKgval ItePublican wOtild appreciate le for them ,to OW; 1'Ol tc unanimous c,onscni". am iSbui to make. es enta, I a;sk unanimons con- at immediately after the 114 Of S. 2615, for which a confer- 1 notbe asked in ttle Senate unta se So r -,eulteSts, the Senat.e Iroceed- ehaffelo the cOnSiciera; oT that the text .ef S. si:s- .by-- the nide', SUbStitiited Tor' - 404.11,--1711; thalf.11,. 1'74Cai , proceed Inuneddately to ihIrs and ttii riedlately to finer ;ardht a itiotion' to reconsider" oh PassUge of beth be ?? JAILImai,ilmous e.cm40.1.17 ? - watlyect. , President, Will the: I yield. wonder' about tieir - (h ing waived. is' e ere perfectly agree- g?13Oth bills ?to the o ei7 waive a motion n . If the Senator wilt , . . ?o g the rules of proce- bohe does, if such a-. a 7 n.were Made ' t coUld be held tip,.. , Tor days. This way it- . . . - .the Issue briznediately. S. Poth bills would go oVeir . yes. ? S. o we understand how: faith we should know, fo make any inOtion. clay's? , ?filot that I know of* s a situation.where.' 9 e lire 'no dards under the table, no. es,-, no o eriin: gs. President, I havs; on to the request except the out 'a Motion to reconsicter7 Ag,0 my mina and I do ii-or Anybody else Would, but If a7 q repoUSider is made irrimedi= a motion to table can be made ar the, as we 'have done hundreds ' or sal T.fini very, very retic- ye ti s right by unanimous - it Were.,Ieft to the Senator. oracle a ne I would ask the Sen7. e wou4 consider, deleting that, oWs ave no desire to delay. ess of this legislation. . I appreciate what: shed Senator from ColOrado,. epiillican leader, just said: make a 'Personal request, I hope: ator will alloW Ina to proceed in er, wigi my asstrance :to him_ o siptgluge, 'there ii'noth- 6 table, and it is one waY: ?nging tihxi:Spleis61, .which has en.- .: MliO,r..rc,i.t 9 a head,_ with e?tat this wouldnot set a prece- . ri!..-1 up sure the Senator. ave ,ailYthing Under the table? llke that, but I statOd inY,, -$Oriator thinks it, is d" be perfectly willing , ,. -.,, i i ?117t . niit tic') -0-.1e6 .V.4.t_T. Piu...?......t.W4. Sliguld nOt7Ve c n la:,*u?,repecient,,,, TVF. ANSIIEW. I 4gFeq:_Triq l?. sefliething -alit iatho:fo,pe wnsiderecl, a precedent. ."..741-,CY11r: X14.4 ...he sinatOil, r rit,_res.prving. til 12,01 ,..t.9. ci0.5.6..,9 ... x,,...40 izit O.12,1PCI. as T im erstand the agreement, house. bill, UM', 1146, Ny2410 not besa,llgil up, Until:. a'..ft.,e. the passage. of the Senate. hilt ft..A.Tsriktt)., The 6'e:hater is thiTect.Th ri the Senate big v-F6Ina go ' over 'to-flie oe or_,. -1Vrf: ICLICLV' Then f further- coriSfaersition. Then theliOnse bill aiiiWaict to "ebrife-rin" to -the Whate bill ai-Pas-Sed,- *Ourd then he -EsiaieTanct also : sefit-16- 'the Tratio io-ITitt ' tZe ITOu.SO vreigata,Ziellie iiPlIPii Ol as ting_again on ' the' llolise 'bill: or lo Tale up .the Senate" hill-fFoiti tfie start: If if 'saw fit. it Would giiie the fto'itse an option, ' Mr: MAITSPTSVb: The enat.d5r IS cor7 1'0' ilitliOultilheitilista4e eaothbilis viariiffbe-the Seine:- '1C,17: 1=11:Ter iiiic the House Could Proceed to 'act again by-tising tHe Senate , bill: ' - Mr.'MX* " ,F'41,: :5:The ?en?,pqr is col.- ' r. AttrN I have no objection. IL-EP:VIM -AS--1 iiiidetStan4 the re-, cinegt-i'therF Weida-be fie -votes, one on tile-polka:a of the-Senate Fill and one on thelp e- of ThelTouse Fill as amend= edlo a3vrftt- 'Co Orin' firthe-geriate Mil. 'it-x.7 , . : The tenaMr is eor- Mr: EftVT11 'I' tifaxik the senator. ' ? Mr:101/Srn rt. I a",sk for:the"yeas arialia "ioilho ---..fhe ' OFF!CER-WitTiont obleeti_ _, _On ? e WM' be Watced. " 'Mr7'1VPIMPTE . f OSE that it be iii ofiter-at this- thrieTo 0.sk ter theyeas and, nays, no OMY"iiii-they erictng FRI, Which 'The' PtiSIDINt 0 .cElf:Firat, is p.1., I' Understand IS readY. orithircrreading, but on. na-z- 1746. - theredbleetferi: to.; tliel :-.anirriOui:con-,. senti'equest? " "Mr; lvall8P/E12b. Whi '-uninimous- consent request does the Ch. 'r 'refer to? ThePft, af.'MIDIIM' 0 -The' one the Senator just niaile. -Mr: 1VrA17SPTEE13; That we ot,e on The PAIZID/110, OPP:1Elt:NO-i, that we: prbeeteto fhe-T-r,01,4 till 'afrei-wvd. Ts there *object:an? The ChZir hears no objection' , andItIs so Ordered. - Mr. M'Al/sFTELT). I 'ask' forlthe yeas ' and nays'iiii. both Fills: - - ' a . ' -The 1611ESID/lill orPretn. rs there suffis fent- second . the requesi for the yels glia'lia:yel ' "The Yea's and 147ys Were oilfired: ' 'Iter''AftE11." Mr. 'PreSkient, .r:sleSire' to siAile roc-Viiirnt ,on_the okrimittee stibiffitiite: yield ni_Yeeff 2 minutes. 'The'r16EE If1TOPPMErt. The Sen- aCo:i from: 4,:labralla iS, feceinigcl, - -444,..A.:Itil4N.Mr...,, President, j plan to yap for thecoileg subatitule I shall not call Zpr. the yeas and, nays on the adoption pf .the committee substitute. but I iall ,yptg, for iLbeganze it Is a vast il4P.K0Yenient over ...the bill as introduced, beggliSe. ?it. does ?have the Wruinick ?1 '1,, ? amendment in it. It has the increase from eight to 15 as the required number of employees to put employers under the provisions of the EEOC. It eliminates religious schools and educational insti- tutiOns from the religious aspect of dis- crimination. It is a vast improvement OW.. .the. bill as introduced, and I shall sliPport the committee substitute. DOIVIINICK. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes. We have engaged in a pretty tough debate on this bill for a very long period of time. I 11414 thought when the bill CAMO PIO that we would have completed it long before this. I feel, however, that the debate itself and the amendments which. have been adopted have substan- tially improved the bill. We now have all classifications of employees having the right to redress employment griev- ances in the Federal courts. We have not unfairly harassed the very small em- ployers by going to the extreme of ex- tending the coverage of the bill to em- ployers of eight or more employees. The present bill qoverage of employers with 15 or more employees is much more reasonable. We have taken care of the aittlati011 brought out by the Senator from North Carolina and the..Senator from Alabam& on elected officials and tbeir.personal staffs. A number of other amendments have been, adopted that, in my opinion, have so sub.stantially improved the bill that I Plink we can work it out either by action of the House or in conference. As a re- sult, I.intend to support the bill on Anal passage. In conclusion. I would like to thank colleagues who, despite strong pressures to t13.e contrary exercised great degrees of allegiance to principle to make this bill truly a representative Senate bill. Additionally, I wish to compliment MY assistant. Mr. Daniel T. Moyle, Jr., for his excellent and persistent efforts on MY behalf, Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President. as I stated earlier, this is the 21st full day of debate. We have had more than 30 roll- calls. Sut the Senate. in involdng cloture, has determined that it is time to get on with the passage of this bill. In a very few minutes we will be voting on the final passage of that bill. I think it. is clear to everyone here that the bill represents the ,pverwhelming will of the majority of the ? psngte. I believe that_this bill, as amended in the Sena,te,will assure a greater measure ?of equality in employment opportunities io the Pa.tion'As women work= anctto its 41111OZitics, belieVe trepresents a major step forward Jn the struggle to end job cliS.PriMination in our society. I think it would be useful to review some ?of the steps that have been taken in the, ,Senattein modifying this bill and the significant changes in the existing law made by this bill when it is finally pp.ssed. First, as to the method of enforcement. This was a long and hard-fought issue. The simple question was the appropriate and best method of enforcement powers for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Many of us felt that the best method of enforcement was the tirae7tion0Xed adglii1Utrative agency ap- ease 2001408/2e: CIA-RDR73B00296R0004001-00021-4 t 4PP mmttltmftpApEfattols-EwisimeR 86 R000400100021-4 February 22, 19 roved S 2299 visions of this section, all private and public educational institutions, which are not re- ligious educational institutions, would now be covered under the provisions of Title VII. With the elimination of the exemption, the employment practices of such institutions most of which have previously been covered by other relevant state and federal laws, would now be expected to conform to the standards of equal employment opportunity as established under Title VII, and employ- ment practices such as hiring, promotion, transfer, and termination would be subject to strict equal employment standards. The exemption in this section for religious corporations, associations, educational insti- tutions, or societies to allow such entities to employ individuals of a particular re- ligion to perform work connected with the particular corporation, association, educa- tional institution or society, has been broad- ened' to allOw such religious preference re- gardless of the particular job which the in- dividual is being considered. SECTION 4(a) This section of the bill contains the major provisions for the enforcement functions which are provided to the EEOC for the pre- vention of unlawful employment practices. S. 2515 revises the present section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to enable the EEOC to process a charge of em- ployment discrimination through the inves- tigation and conciliation stages of voluntary compliance. In addition, however, the provi- sions or S. 2515 provide that if such should prove unsuccessful, then the EEOC would be empowered to file an action against the re- spondent in the appropriate Federal District Court. The accomplishment of the stated purpose of Title VII, the elimination of employment discrimination in all areas of employment in this Nation, has not been accomplished under the present system of voluntary com- pliance through EEOC procedures or, in the alternative, the private law suit. Under the provisions of section 4 of the bill, the over- riding public interest in equal employment opportunity would be asserted through di- rect Federal enforcement. Accordingly, this section amends sections 706(a) through (g) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 706( a) ?This subsection would ' empower the Commission to prevent persons from engaging in unlawful employment practices under sections 703 and 704 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As these noted sections remain largely unchanged, the unlawful employment practices which were enumerated in 1964 in the original Act, and as defined and expanded by the courts in litigation since that time, and by these amendments, remain in effect. Section 706(b)?This subsection sets out the procedures to be followed when a charge of an unlawful employment practice is filed with the Commission. The present require- ment that charges must be in writing and under oath or affirmation has been retained. In order to accord respondents fair notice that charges are pending against them, this subsection provides that the Commission must serve a notice of the charge on the re- spondent within ten days; further, the Com- mission would be expected to investigate the charge as quickly as possible and to make its determination on whether there is reason- able cause to believe that the charge is true. It is not intended that failure to give notice Of the charge to the respondent within ten days should prejudice the rights of the ag- grieved party. If the Commission finds no reasonable Mute, it must' dismiss the charge; if it finds reasonable cause, it must attempt to concili- ate the case. During the Commission's in- vestigation of the charge, the allegations would not be made public by the Commis- sion, and if it finds that there is not rea- sonable cause to believe that the charge Is true, it shall dismiss the charge and no- tify the complainant and the respondent of Its decision. This subsection also makes a number of other changes in existing law: 1. Under present law, a charge may be filed only by a person aggrieved under oath or by a member of the Commission where that member has reasonable cause to believe a violation has occurred. This subsection would permit a charge to be filed under oath or affirmation by or on behalf of a person aggrieved, or by an officer or employee of the Commission upon the request of a per- son claiming to be aggrieved. The purpose of this provision would enable aggrieved per- sons to have charges processed under cir- cumstances where they are unwilling to come forward publicly for fear of economic or physical reprisals. In this connection, it is intended that the device of a Commission charge may be used to maintain the confi- dential identity of the persons aggrieved and that no disclosure need be made of the iden- tity of person aggrieved. 2. The Commission would be required to make its determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, "so far as prac- ticable," within 120 days from the filing of the charge or from the date upon which the Commission is authorized to act on the charge under section 706(c) or (d). The Commission, where appropriate, would be required in its determination of reaSonable cause to accord substantial weight to final findings and orders made by State or local authorities under State and local laws. 3. This subsection and section 8(c) of the bill add appropriate provisions to carry out the intent of the present statute to provide full coverage for joint labor-management committees controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on- the-Job training programs. While these joint labor-management committees are prohibit- ed under section 703(d) of the present act from discriminating, they were not expressly included in the prohibition against discrim- inatory advertising or retaliation against persons participating in Commission pro- ceedings (sec. 704(a) and (b) ) or in the procedures for filing changes in section 706(a). Section 706(c)?This subsection retains the present requirement that the Commis- sion defer for a period of 60 days to State or local agencies which have a State or local law prohibiting the unlawful employment practice alleged and establishing or author- izing a State or local authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto (this period for deferral is 120 days during the first year after the effective date of such law). The present law is changed by deleting the phrase "no charge may be filed" with the Commission by an aggrieved person in such State or locality until the deferral period has expired. The present law is somewhat un- clear respecting the nature of Commission action on charges filed with it prior to resort to the State or local agency. The new lan- guage clarifies the present law by permitting a charge to be filed but prohibiting the Com- mission from taking any action with respect thereto until the prescribed deferral period has elapsed (see a similar holding by the Supreme Court in Love v. Pullman Co. de- cided on January 17, -1972 (No. 70-5033), where the Court held that a complaint filed with the Commission, then orally deferred to the State agency for the required deferral period, and then reactivated automatically after the deferral period had expired was proper procedure under the provisions of ? 706(b) and (d) of the present Act. Section 706(d).?This subsection requires deferral to State or local anti-discrimination agencies, similar to provisions contained in subsection 703(c), in the case of charges filed by an officer or employee of the Com- mission. Section 706(e).?This subsection sets forth the time limits controlling certain actions lot the Commission under the provisions of the bill. Under the present law, charges must be filed within 90 days after an alleged unlawful employment practice has occurred. In cases where the Commsision defers to a State or local agency under the provisions of section 706(c) or (d), the charge must presently be flied within 30 days after the person ag- grieved receives notice that the State or local agency has terminated its proceedings, or within 210 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred, whichever is earlier. The amendments to this subsection would now provide that charges be filed within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice, a limitation period similar to that contained in the Labor Management Rela- tions Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. ? 160(b) ). In establishing the new time period for the filing of charges, it is not intended that ex- isting law, which has shown an inclination to interpret this type of time limitation to give the aggrieved person the maximum ben- efit of the law, should be in any way circum- scribed. Existing case law which has deter- mined that certain types of violations are continuing in nature, thereby measuring the running of the required time period from the last occurrence of the discrimination and not from the first occurrence is continued, and other interpretations of the courts max- imizing the coverage of the law are not af- fected. It is intended by expanding the time period for filing charges in this subsection that aggrieved individuals, who frequently are untrained laymen who are not always aware of the discrimination which is prac- ticed against them, should be given a greater opportunity to prepare their charges and file their complaints, and that existent but undiscovered acts of discrimination should not escape the effect of the law through a procedural oversight. Similarly, the time period allowing a de- termination by a State or local anti-discrim- ination agency has been extended to 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment ? practice occurred or within 30 days after the State or local agency has terminated pro- ceedings under the State or local law, which- ever is earlier. This subsection also requires that notice of the charge be served on the respondent with 'n 10 days after its having been filed. Section 706(f).?This subsection, which is new, sets forth the procedures to be fol- lowed, in those cases where the Commission Is unable to achieve a satisfactory concilia- tion after a finding of reasonable cause, for securing compliance with the provisions of Title VII. The procedures set forth in this subsection are intended to place the primary responsibility for enforcing violations of Title VII in the Commission and to shift them from the private plaintiff where they have been under the existing provisions of title VII. Section 7,06(f) (1)?Under this subpara- graph, if the Commission is unable to secure a conciliation agreement pursuant to section 706(b) that is acceptable to the Commis- sion within 30 days from the filing of the charge or within 30 days after expiration of any period of reference under subsection (c) or (d), it would promptly so notify the Gen- eral Counsel who may bring a civil action against the respondent in the appropriate district court, if the respondent is not a government, governmental agency, or politi- cal subdivision. In the case of a respondent that is a gov- ernment, governmental agency, or political subdivision, if conciliation fails, the Com- mission will take no further action and will refer the case to the Attorney General who Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 2490, Approved For R - An0 bring a civil action in the appro2riate _ aistriet- court. ' t,,11.. respect to cases arising_ tuifier this eCtiOxi, if the Couun1ssion;,0has dis- '-' In the charge, or (b) 150_ do's have, elapsed from the filing of the obarie or period of reference to State agencits under eubsection 7 (c) or (d), whicheveLialater, Vii"thOut the Qeneral Oottn.sel or trikAttorney ?General, as' the case may ,be, having issued ,* 00111Plaint tin.der,section _706 (f):, or_wZhout .C. .01;c3mission having entered, inTO ar.,,,con-..., tion agreement to which tile person ag- ved is a party, the person aggrieved ,may an action in the appropriate dritrict -Within 90 days after belng:no_tified Opt. c1 civil actions are tp,he.toverned. seetions 06 (f) through (10 as appli-_ 41;04e,, rp. providing this provision, it 4, in-. 4 that the individual who has_inen etdd by . a violation of Title, VII? shouid ? hi , rce to abaAdo, n.114 4843,-nitrelY, ecallSe 01 a., decision, ay the agency_ that -"there is insufficient grounds upon whioh to : OOP ..14.t In cimrP or that thgrperson ev'ed should have to enclure.lengthy de- the agency does not act withducji1li- 44.aged."Accorgingly, the provisions eSeribed.abOve Would allow the persot ag7 -Wed 'to etipt to pursue his or her,??own . '' 'in, the courts where agency astion het tirove satisfaetory. -s101.4 this remedy, it is intelided Ursejki this form of rernedy_w_W be tionand not the rule, ancillittt the oiity of complaints will be handled thrtigig4 ...the offices of the ,F;EOCZ.110Weva, as 140. :14k wa's T4Iiiht_s t,c.Yeclre'r?. arPAgra- II 4ei.....the,provislons of, Title, V.,I,l, it ;Mat all avenues of relief, btleft 14 and effective relief. sue iit t.aption, by the Compiles:ton iiVr the i* lividual right t ,to aCtry or unresponsive, it is not that duplics.tion of proceed,ings ' allowed. Therefore, in any_pro-. erk the General counsel,or_the deneral, as the case may be?,is_pro- Milt' 'aue diligence within the _thne speifte in this ,subsection?- theipetson eti 'would be precluded from instUut- 'indivi4ual action until such time as specific conclitions of thisAub- e ,rict Met. ,.. sueli complaint brought by the n etr in 'the chvarge as clainilia to e iigrieved Or in the case of a charge Ailed an-o-,fticer or employee, of the Corgnalsgon, any person Whom the charge alle,ges was et* rby the alleged unlawful emit-9y- O1eg,: the court may upon timely ion of the complainant, nppopt an _ and 'Authorize he commencement , e -action 'Without the, payment of sees, ae6Ury in such circumstances ss It luet; ' e "Attorney General or .the a Court:00, upon timely applicalion jeet to the court's discretion, play 1.34,..41. tell a private action, it, he . es that t e private action is of general ._ c invorte;nce. In addition, the eclat, is di discretion to 'stayproceedings for not tban edoaays pending the termindion tate or local proceedings or efforts_ by *e 'CoronlissiOn to obtain voluntary C0/11- glance, 14 establishlpg the enforcement provisions .el'Or'this subsection and subsection ,70Zii .. entity, it is not intended that any of ,the Visions confaine4 therein are designed to eet :the present use of class action lawsuits d'Or Title VSin conjunction with Rule, 23 the rederal ules of Civil Procedure. ?The E'iA have h'een particularly congizant of tact that claims under Title VII involve tt :vindication' of a major public Jntezest, Sna,that any action under the Apt invelyes cOnstdetations beyond those raised by the i i4iyi4i,al clahnant. As a consequence, the 1edtpg eases 1..O thts area to date have seCtig- that Title VII claims are necessszny action complaints and that, accordingly. T, 3B00296RgVE40019002 it is,,,,no4 zIggesury that each individual en- rAllet,..Uatler the claim be named in the priginal_ charge or in_the claim for relief. Section 706(1) (2)?This subsection pro- vides a, procedure by which the General Comisel or the Attorney General in a case invorvins a _government, ,_ governmental tigen:nY,_or political subdivision, could secure a-thiee-judge court to hear_And determine an _ italcw brouvat by _him under this section, if' such requestis accorupanie_d by a _certi- fieate that the case is of general public im- portance. The chief judge of the court is responsible for appointing the three-judge court'. Cases are to be expedited in every way, and Ei1/515-66f6 ITOTil the three-judge court are to be appealed directly to the Supreme Court. Sectioit 706 (t) (3) and 706 (I) (4) ?Under theselqagraph, if a,three_judge court is not iicliidated the chief judge is required to cresigriSfe? district judge to hear the case. If no page is available, then the chief judge of the circuit assigns the, judge. Cases are to be -heard at the earliest parcticable date and eXpedited in every way. . Seatioh. 06(1.) (5)?This subsection au- thoriZes-the Comission or the Attorney Gen- eral fn a case involving_ a government, gov- erninental iigericy or political subdivision based-upon a p_r_eliminary inevstigation of a charge filed, to bring an action for appro- prilite timporaii or preliminary relief, pend- ing the hnal disposition_of the charge. Such aCtloas are to be assigned for_bearing at the estrIleat possible dateand expedited in every- way. S'ec?Loa 706 (0_(1)?This subjection, which is the' strine_sas the present section 706(f) of the t,:grants the district egurts, jurisdic- tfoneiver actioniaroughtunder this title and pinvlaes*the venue requirements. It A also inteocled Alia/ oue_of the funda- mental kriaictional attributes. exercised by the cou under_any actions brought before it Unclerlhis Actincludes the ability to grant such leihporary_or preliminary relief as it deerni",)ust and_proper. 'Section 0d(g)(2)--This sub?Section is sim- ilar to? tlie present section 706_(g) of the Act. It 'authorizes the court, upon a finding that the rtspo.ndent has engaged in or is engaging in an unlawful , employment practice to en- join 04 respondent from such unlawful conduct And order such allirmative relief in- cliiditig, but not limited to, reinstatement or .hfling of employees, with or without back pay as, will effeetuate the. policies of the Act. The court's award or bank p5y. is limited to that Iv:high Kerins from a date not more than , two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Corm41??221i- ...Interim __earnings or earnable with reasonable diligence by the aggrievedperson(s) would operate to ? redUce, tbe baelLpay otherwise allowable. The. provisions of this subsection are in- tended to give the court wide discretion, as has been generally exercised by the courts under existing law, in fashioning the most complete relief possible. In dealing with the present section 706(g) the courts have stressed that the scope of relief under that section of the Act is intended to make the victims of unlawful discrimination whole, and that the attainment of this objective rests not only upon the elimination of the particular unlawful employment practice complained of but also requires that the con- sequences and effects of the unlawful em- ployment practice be, so far as possible, re- stored to a position where they would have been were it not for the unlawful discrimina- tion. This broad reading of the need for effective remedies under this subsection is Intended to be preserved in this bill in order to effectively combat the presence of em- ployment discrimination. SECTION 4(B) Sept ton. 706(k)?This subsection is similar to section 706(k) of the present Act allow- ing the award of attorney's fees. It adds a 22, 1972 provision allowing a prevailing party, in an action brought by the General Counsel or the Attorney General, who is an employer with less than 25 employees or a labor union with less than 25 members to be indemnified by the United States Treasury upon certification of the Commission, in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for their defense, including all expenses and reasonable attorney's fees in- curred subsequent to receiving notice of a charge filed against them. Any such prevail- ing party with 25 to 100 employees whose average income from such employment is less than$7,500, or in the case of a labor union with 25 to 100 members, would be indemnified for one-half of the cost of their defense in an amount not to exceed $2,500. Costs are to be submitted by application to the Commission evidenced by vouchers and are to be deemed reasonable so long as they are comparable to the total amount of the expenses and attorneys fees incurred by the Commission in its investigation and prose- cution of the charge. Any district court with jurisdiction over the proceedings would have the authority to make the determination pro- vided for by the subsection. SECTION 5 This section amends section 707, concern- ing the Attorney General's "pattern or prac- tice" action, to provide for a transfer of this function to the Commission two years after the enactment of the bill. The bill further provides for current "pattern or practice" jurisdiction for the commission from the date of enactment until the transfer is complete. The transfer is subject to change in accord- ance with a Presidential reorganization plan if not vetoed by Congress. The section would provide that currently pending proceedings would continue without abatement, that all court orders and decrees remain in effect, and that upon the transfer the Commission would be substituted as a party for the United States of America or the Attorney General as appropriate. The Commission would have authority to investigate and act on pattern or practice charges except that any action would follow the procedures of section 706. SECTION 6 This section amends section '709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, entitled "Investiga- tions, Inspections, Records, State Agencies." Section 709 (a)?This subsection, which gives the Commission the right to examine and copy documents in connection with its Investigation of a charge, would remain un- changed. Section 709 (b) ?This subsection would au- thorize the Commission to cooperate with State and local fair employment practice agencies in order to carry out the purposes of the title, and to enter into agreements with such agencies under which the com- mission would refrain from processing cer- tain types of charges or relieve persons from the record keeping requirements. This sub- section would make two changes in the pres- ent statute. Under this subsection, the Com- mission could, within the limitations of funds appropriated for the purpose, also engaged in and contribute to the cost of research and other projects undertaken by these State and local agencies and pay these agencies in advance for services rendered to the Commission. The subsection also deletes the reference to private civil actions under section 706(e) of the present statute. Section 709 (c) ?This subsection, like the present statute, would require employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor-management apprenticeship committees subject to the title to make and keep certain records and to make reports therefrom to the Commission. Under the present- statute, a party required to keep records could seek an exemption from these requirements on the ground of undue hard- ship either by applying to the Commission Approved For Re ease 2001408/28: CIA-RDP73B00296R000400100021-4 t ?Febriiciry 22, /9APProved EttiNtP?91001P8OG/SIWROREMK1196R000400100021-4 S 2301 or bringing a civil action in the district court. This subsection would require the party seeking the exemption first to make an application to the Commission and only if the Commission denies the request could the party bring an action in the district court. This subsection would also authorize the Commission to apply for a court order compelling compliance with the recordkeep- ing and reporting obligations set forth in the subsection. Section 709 (d)?This subsection would eliminate the present exemption from record- keeping requirements for those employers in States and political -subdivisions with fair employment practice laws or for employers subject to Federal executive order or agency recordkeeping requirements. Under this sub- section, the Commission would consult with interested State and other Federal agencies in order to coordinate the Federal record- keeping requirement under section 709(c) with those adopted by such agencies. The subsection further provides that the Com- mission furnish to such agencies informa- tion pertaining to State and local fair em- ployment agencies, on condition that the information would not be made public prior to the institution of State or local proceed- ings. ? Section 709(e) ?Under this subsection, the Commission or the Attorney General would have the authority to direct the person hav- ing custody of any record or paper required by section 709(c) to be preserved or main- tained to make such record or paper available for inspection or copying by the Commis- sion or the Attorney General. The district court of the judicial district where the de- mand is made or the papers are located would have jurisdiction by appropriate proc- ess to compel the production of such record or paper. The subsection further provides that the members of the Commission and its representatives or the Attorney General and his representatives, could not, unless ordered by the court, disclose any record or paper produced except to Congress or a congres- sional committee, to other government agencies, or in the presentation of cases be- fore a court or a grand jury. SECTION 7 This section would amend section 710 Of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to make section 11 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 'U.S.C. ? 161) , to the extent appropriate, ap- plicable to Comrnasion investigations. The person served by the Commission with the subpoena could petition the Commission to revoke the subpoena within 5 days. On ap- plication of the Commission, an appropri- ate district court could order a person to obey a subpoena and failure to comply with the court order would be punishable in contempt proceedings. Section 11 of the National Labor Relations Act also contains provisions relat- ing to privileges of witnesses, immunity from prosecution, fees, process, service, and return, and information and assistance from other agencies. SECTION 8 (A) AND (B) These subsections would amend sections 703(a) .and 703(c) (2) of the present statute to make it clear that discrimination against applicants for employment and applicants for membership in labor organizations is an un- lawful employment practice. This subsection would merely be declaratory of present law. SECTION 8(C) (1) AND (2) These subsections would amend section 701 (a) and (b) of the present statute to make clear that joint labor-management ap- prenticeship committees are covered by those provisions which relate to discriminatory ad- vertising and retaliation against individuals participating in Commission proceedings. SECTION 8(d) ? This subsection would amend section 705(a) of the present statute to permit a Member of the Commission to serve until his successor is appointed but not for more than 60 days when Congress is in session unless the successor has been nominated and the nomination submitted to the Senate, or after the adjournment sine die of the ses- sion of the Senate in which such nomina- tion was submitted. The rest of the subsection provides that the Chairman of the Commission on behalf of the Commission, would be responsible, except as provided in section 705(b), for the administrative operations of the Commis- sion and for the appointment of officers, agents, attorneys, hearing examiners, and other employees of the Commission, and Regional Directors, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, in accordance with Federal law, as he deems necessary. SECTION (e) This subsection would provide a new sec- tion 705(b) of the Act which establishes a General Counsel appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a four (4) year term. The responsibili- ties of the General Counsel would include, in addition to those the Commission may prescribe and provided by law, the prosecu- tion and the conduct of all litigation as so provided in sections '706 and '707 of the Act. The General Counsel would appoint regional attorneys with the concurrence of the Chair- man and other employees in the Office of the General Counsel in order to effectively carry out his functions and responsibilities. Furthermore, this subsection would con- tinue the General Counsel on the effective date of the act in that position until a suc- cessor has been appointed and qualified. Subsections (b) through (j) of section '705 of the act are redesignated as Subsections (e) through (k), respectively. SECTION 5(f) This subsection would amend section 705(g) (1) of the present Act to permit the Commission to accept uncompensated serv- ices for the purpose of publicizing its activ- ities in the media. SECTION 8(g) This subsection would eliminate the pro- vision in present section 705(g) authorizing the Commission to request the Attorney Gen- eral to intervene in private civil actions and instead permit the Commission itself to in- tervene in such civil actions as provided in section 706. SECTION 8(h) This subsection would, subject to one ex- ception, permit the Commission to delegate any of its functions, duties and powers to such persons as it may designate by regula- tion. A number of other Federal agencies have similar broad authority to delegate functions, e.g., the Securities and Exchange Commission (15 U.S.C. ? 78(d) (1), the In- terstate Commerce Commission (49 U.S.C. ? 17(5) ), and the Federal Communications Commission (47 U.S.C. ? 155(d)), The ex- ception is as follows: The Commission could not delegate its au- thority under section 709(b) to make agree- ments with States under which the Commis- sion agrees to refrain from processing cer- tain charges or to relieve certain persons from the recordkeeping requirements. The Coms mission would however be authorized to delegate this power or any of its other powers to groups of three or more members of the Commission. SECTION 5(I) This subsection would afford additional protection to officers, agents, and employees of the Commission in the performance of their official duties by making 18 U.S.C. 1114 applicable to them. SECTION 9 (A), (5), (C) , AND (D) These subsections would make certain modifications in the position of the Chairman of the Commission and the members of the Commission and include the General Coun- sel in the executive pay scale, so as to place them in a position of parity with officials in comparable positions in agencies having sub- stantially equivalent powers Such as the Na- tional Labor Relations Board,, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Power Commission. SECTION 10 Section 715?This section, which is new, establishes an Equal Employment Opportu- nity Council (Council) composed of the Sec- retary of Labor, the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Attorney General, the Chairman of the United States Civil Service Commissio,n and the Chairman of the United States Civil Rights Commission or their respective des- ignees. The Council will have the respon- sibility to coordinate and implement pro- grams to promote the efficiency of all the various branches of government with respon- sibility for equal employment opportunities. The Council will submit an annual report to the President and Congress including a report of its activities and recommendations as to legislative or administrative changes it considers desirable. SECTION I Section 717 (a)?This subsection would make clear that all personnel actions of the U.S. Government affecting employees or ap- plicants for employment shall be made free from any discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. All em- ployees of any agency, department, office or commission having positions in the competi- tive service are covered by this section. Section 717(b)?Under this subsection, the Civil Service Commission is given the author- ity to enforce the provisions of subsection (a) through appropriate remedies. These remedies may Include but are not limited to back pay for applicants as well as employees denied promotion opportunities, reinstate- ment, hire, and immediate promotion. Any remedy needed to fully recompense the em- ployee for his loss, both financially and pro- fessionally is considered appropriate under this subsection. The Civil Service Commission is also given authority to issue rules and regulations necessary to carry out its re- sponsibilities under this section. The Civil Service Commission also shall annually re- view national and regional equal employment opportunity plans and be responsible for review and evaluation of all agency equal employment opportunity programs. Finally, agency and executive department heads and officers of the District of Columbia shall com- ply with such rules and regulations, submit an annual equal employment opportunity plan and notify any employee or applicant of any final action taken on any complaint of discrimination filed by him. Section 717 (c) and (d)?The provisions of sections 706(f) through (k) as applicable, concerning private civil actions by aggrieved persons, are made applicable to aggrieved Federal employees or applicants. They could file a civil action within 30 days of notice of final action on a complaint made pursuant t9 section 717 (b) , or after 180 days from the filing of an initial charge, or an appeal with the Commission. The authority given to the Commission or the limitations placed upon the Commission under sections 706(f) through (k) would apply to the Civil Service Commission or the agencies, as appropriate, in connection with a civil action brought under section 707(c) . So, for example, if the Civil Service Commission or agency does not issue an order within 180 days after a com- plaint or appeal is filed, the aggrieved person may also instiute a civil action. If such ac- tion is ? instituted within one year of the filing of the complaint or appeal, the Civil Service Commission or agency may request that the action be stayed or dismissed upon a showing that it has been acting with due diligence, that it anticipates issuance of an order within a reasonable time on the corn- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 S 2302 Approved For RetlogfratTAMPA:lcieERIIMINWWW40010003-Votruary 22,-1972' plaint or appeal, that the case or proceeding is exceptional and that extension of exclusive jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission or agency is warranted. Section 717(e)?This subsection provides that nothing in this act relieves any Gov- ernment agency or official of his existing nondiscriminating obligations under the Constitution, other statutes, or his or its responsibilities under Executve Order 11478 relating to equal employment opportunity in the Federal Government. SECTION 12 Section 716 is amended to provide for con- sultation of the Attorney General, the Chair- man of the Civil Service Commission, and the Chairman of the Equal Employment Op- portunity Commission regarding rules, regu- lations and policy in the performance of their responsibilities under this act. It does not in any way limit each of the officials in independently carrying out ther respective obligations under this title. SECTION 13 Ths section provides that the amended provisions of Section 706 would apply to charges filed with the Commission prior to the effective date of this Act. In addition, those new or amended sections of Title VII not specifically made inapplicable to current charges, would be applicable to such existing charges. SECTION 14 This section provides that no government contract, or portion thereof, can be denied, withheld, terminated, or superseded by a gov- ernment agency under the Executive Order 11246 or any other order of law without ac- cording the respective employer a full hear- ing and adjudication pursuant to 6 U.S.C. ? 554 et. seq where such employer has an affirmative action program for the same facil- ity which had been accepted by the Govern- ment within the prior twelve months. Such plan shall be deemed to be accepted by the Government if the appropriate compliance agency has accepted such plan and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance has not dis- approved of such plan within 45 days. How- ever, an employer who substantially deviates from the previously accepted plan is excluded from the protection afforded by this section. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion now is on agreeing to the commit- tee amendment in the nature of a sub- stitute, as amended. The committee substitute, as amend- ed, was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion now is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, and was read the third time. The PRESIDING OrtoiCER. The bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall it pass? Mr. MANSviELD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OrtICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The question is on final passage of S. 2515. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. I an- nounce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. BATH) the Senator from Indiana (Mr. I-IAarKE) , the Senator from Wash- ington (Mr. JACKSON), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. MCCLELLAN) , the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. McGovERN) , the Senator from Maine (Mr. MusKIE), and the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Ful.- BRIGHT) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULDRIGHT) , the Senator from Washing- ton (Mr. JAcKsoN), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. McGovcaN), and the Senator from Maine (Mr. MusKic) would each vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER) is absent by leave of the Senate on official committee business. The Senator from Wyoming (Mr. HAN- sEs) and the Senator from Iowa' (Mr. MILLER) are necessarily absent. The Senator from South Dakota (Mr. MUNDT) is absent because of illness. The result was announced?yeas '13, nays 16, as follows: [No. 66 Leg.] YEAS-73 Aiken Fong Nelson Allott Gambrel' Packwood Anderson Gravel Pastore Beall Griffin Pearson Bellmon Gurney Pell Bennett Harris Percy Bentsen Hart Proxmire Bible Hatfield Randolph Boggs Hollings Ribicoff Brooke Hruska Roth Buckley Hughes Saxbe Burdick Humphrey Schweiker Byrd, W. Va. Inouye Scott Cannon Javits Smith Case Jordan, Idaho Spong Chiles Kennedy Stafford Church Magnuson Stevens Cook Mansfield Stevenson Cooper Mathias Symington Cotton McGee Taft Cranston McIntyre Tunney Curtis Metcalf Weicker Dole Mondale Williams Dominick Montoya Eagleton Moss NAYS-16 Fannin Goldwater Jordan, N.C. Long Sparkman Stennis NOT VOTING-11 Baker Hartke Miller Bayh Jackson Mundt Fulbright McClellan Muskie Hansen McGovern So the bill (S. 2515) was passed, as follows: Allen Brock Byrd, Va. Eastland Mender Ervin Talmadge Thurmond Tower Young - ? S. 2515 An act to further promote equal employ- ment opportunities for American workers Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Equal Employment Opportunities Enforcement Act of 1972". SEC. 2. Section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1961 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e) is amended as follows: (1) In subsection (a) insert "governments, governmental agencies, political subdivi- sions," after the word "individuals". (2) Subsection (b) is amended to read as follows: "(b) The term 'employer' means a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calen- dar weeks in the current or preceding calen- dar year, and any agent of such a person, but such term does not include (1) the United States, a corporation wholly owned by the Government of the United States, an Indian tribe, or any department or agency of the District of Columbia subject by statute to procedures of the competitive service (as defined in section 2102 of title 5 of the United States Code) , or (2) a bona fide pri- vate membership club (other than a labor organization) which is exempt from taxa- tion under sectiosi 601(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, except that during the first year after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunities En- forcement Act of 1971, persons having fewer than twenty-five employees (and their agents) shall not be considered employers." (3) In subsection (e) beginning with the semicolon strike out through the word "as- sistanee". (4) In subsection (e) strike out between "(A)" and "and such labor organization," and insert in lieu thereof "twenty-five or more during the first year after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Oppor- tunities Enforcement Act of 1972, OT (B) fifteen or more thereafter,". (5) In subsection (f) , change the period at the end of the subsection to a colon, and add thereafter the following words: "Pro- vided, however, That the term 'employee' shall not include any person elected to pub- lic office in any State or political subdivision of any State by the qualified voters thereof, or any person chosen by such officer to be a personal assistant, or an immediate adviser In respect to the exercise of the constitu- tional OT legal powers of the office" (6) At the end of subsection (h) insert ? before the period a comma and the follow- ing: "and further includes any governmental industry, business, or activity". ('7) After subsection (1) insert the follow- ing new subsection (j) : "(j) The term 'religion' includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommo- date to an employee's or prospective employ- ee's, religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the em- ployer's business." SEC. 3. Section 702 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 255: 42 U.S.C. 2000e-1) is amended to read as follows: "EXEMPTION "Sm. 702. This title shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious cor- poration, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to per- form Work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational Institution, or society of its religious ac- tivities." SEC. 4. (a) Subsections (a) through (g) of section 706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 259; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5 (a)-(g) ) are amended to read as follows: "(a) The Commission is empowered, as hereinafter provided, to prevent any person from engaging in any unlawful employment practice as set forth in section 703 or 704 of this title. "(b) Whenever a charge is filed by or on behalf of a person claiming to be aggrieved, or by an officer or employee of the Commis- sion upon the request of any person claiming to be aggrieved, alleging that an employer, employment agency, labor organiaztion. or joint labor-management committee control- ling: apprenticeship or other training or re- training, including on-the-job training pro- grams, has engaged in an unlawful employ- ment practice, the Commission shall serve a notice of the charge (including the date, place, and circumstances of the alleged un- lawful employment practice) on such em- ployer, employment agency, labor organize- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Ap_proved For Release 2001/08/28: c1A-RDP731300296R000400100021-4 7ebraary 22, 197Z CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE ,tion, or joint labor-management committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent') within ten days, and shall make an inveatiga- tion thereof. Charges shall be in writing un- der oath or affirmation and shall contain such information and be in such form as the Com- mission requires. Charges shall not be made public by the Commission. If the Commission determines after such investigation that there is not reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, it shall dismiss the charge and promptly notify the person claiming to be aggrieved and the respondent of its action. In determining whether reasonable cause exists, the Commission shall accord substantial weight to final findings and orders made by State or local authorities in proceedings com- menced under State or local law pursuant to the requirements of subsections (c) and (d) . If the Commission determines after such in- vestigation that there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, the Commis- sion shall endeavor to eliminate any such alleged unlawful employment practice by in- formal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion. Nothing said or done during and as a part of such informal endeavors may be made public by the Commission, its officers or employees, or used as evidence in a sub- sequent proceeding without the written con- sent of the persons concerned. Any person who makes public information in violation of this subsection shall be fined not more .than$1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. The Commission shall make its determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, so far as prac- ticable, not later than one hundred and twenty days from the filing of the charge or, where applicable under subsection (c) or (d), from the date upon which the Commission is authorized to take action with respect to the charge. "(c) In the case of a charge filed by or on behalf of a person claiming to be aggrieved alleging an unlawful employment practice occurring in a State or political subdivision of a State which has a State or local law pro- hibiting the unlawful employment practice alleged and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiv- ing notice thereof the Commission shall take no action with respect to the investigation of such charge before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings thave been commenced under the State or local law, unless such pro- ceedings have been earlier terminated, except that such sixty-day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State or local law. If any requirement for the com- mencement of such proceedings is imposed by a State or local authority other than a re- quirement of the filing of a written and signed statement of the facts upon which the proceeding is based, the proceeding shall be deemed to have been commenced for the pur- poses of this subsection at the time such statement is sent by registered or certified mail to the appropriate State or local au- thority. "(a) In the case of any charge tiled by an officer or employee of the Commission alleg- ing an unlawful employment practice occur- ring in a State or political subdivision of a State which has a State or local law prohibit- ing the practice alleged and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to Institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof the Commission shall, before taking any action with respect to such charge, notify the appro- priate State or local officials and, upon re- quest, afford them a reasonable time, but not less than sixty days (provided that such sixty- day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State or local law), unless a shorter period is requested, to act under such State or local law to remedy the practice alleged. "(0) A charge under this section shall be filed within one hundred and eighty days after the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice occurred and notice of the charge (in- cluding the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment practice) shall be served upon the person against whom such charge is made within ten days thereafter, except that in a case of an unlaw- ful employment practice with respect to which the person aggrieved has initially in- stituted proceedings with a State or local agency with authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiv- ing notice thereof, such charge shall be filed by or on behalf of the person aggrieved within three hundred days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred, or within thirty days after receiving notice that the State or local agency has terminated the proceedings under the State or local law, whichever is earlier, and a copy of such charge shall be filed by the Commission with the State or local agency. '(f) (I) If within thirty days after a charge is filed with the Commission or within thirty clays after expiration of any period of ref- erence under subsection (a) or (d) , the Com- mission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation agreement accept- able to the Commission, the Commission shall so notify the General Counsel who may bring a civil action against any respondent not a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision named in the charge. In the case of a respondent which is a govern- ment, governmental agency, or political sub- division, the Commission shall take no fur- ther action and shall refer the case to the Attorney General who may bring a civil ac- tion against such respondent in the appro- priate United States district court. The per- son or persons aggrieved shall have the right to intervene in a civil action brought by the General Counsel or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision. If a charge filed with the Commision pursuant to sub- section (b) is dismissed by the Commission, or if within one hundred and fifty days from the tiling of such charge or the expiration of any period of reference under subsection (a) or (d), whichever is later, the General Coun- sel has not filed a civil action under this section or the Attorney General has not filed a civil action in a case involving a govern- ment, governmental agency, or political sub- division, or the Commission has not entered into a conciliation agreement to which the person aggrieved is a party, the Commission or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency, or po- litical subdivision shall so notify the person aggrieved and within ninety days after the- giving of such notice a civil action may be brought against the respondent named in the charge (1) by the person named in the charge as claiming to be aggrieved or (2) if such charge was filed by an officer or em- ployee of the Commission, by any person Whom the charge alleges was aggrieved by the alleged unlawful employment practice. Upon application by the complainant and in such circumstances as the court may deem just, the court may appoint an attorney for such complainant and may authorize the commencement of the action without the payment of fees, costs, or security. Upon timely application, the court may, in its dis- cretion, permit the Attorney General to in- tervene in such civil action if he certifies that the case is of general public importance. Upon request, the court may, in its discre- tion, stay further proceedings for not more than sixty days pending the termination of State or local proceedings described in sub- sections (a) Or (d) of this section or further S 2303 efforts of the Commission to obtain volun- tary compliance. '(2) In any such proceeding the General Counsel or the Atorney General in a case in- volving a government, governmental agency or political subdivision may file with the clerk of such court a request that a court of three judges be convened to hear and deter- mine the case. Such request by the General Counsel or the Attorney General shall be ac- companied by a certificate that, in his opin- ion, the case is of general public importance. A copy of the certificate and request for a three-judge court shall be immediately fur- nished by such clerk, to the chief judge of the circuit (or in his absence, the presiding cir- cuit judge of the circuit) in which the case is pending Upon receipt of the copy of such re- quest it shall be the duty of the chief judge of the circuit or the presiding circuit judge, as the ease may be, to designate immediately three judges in such circuit, of whom at least one shall be a circuit judge and another of whom shall be a district judge of the court in which the proceeding was insttuted, to hear and determine such case, and it shall be the duty of the judges so designated to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date, to participate in the hearing and deter- mination thereof, and to cause the case to be In every way expedited. An appeal from the final judgment of such court will lie to the Supreme Court. "(3) In the event the General Counsel or the Attorney General fails to file such a re- quest in any such proceeding, it shall be the duty of the chief judge of the district (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) in which the case is pending immediately to designate a judge in such district to hear and deter- mine the ease. In the event that no judge In the district is available to hear and deter- mine the case, the chief judge of the dis- trict, or the acting chief judge, as the case may be, shall certify this fact to the chief judge of the circuit (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) who shall then designate a district or circuit judge of the circuit to hear and determine the case. "(4) It shall be the duty of the judge des- ignated pursuant to this subsection to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date and to cause the case to be in every way expedited. "(5) Whenever a charge is led with the Commission and the Commission concludes on the basis of a preliminary investigation that prompt judicial action is necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, the Com- mission or the Attorney General in a case in- volving a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision, may bring an action for appropriate temporary or prelinineXY re- lief pending final disposition of such charge. It shall be the duty of a court having juris- dicton over proceedings under this section to assign cases for hearing at the earliest practicable date and to cause such cases to be in every way expedited. "(6) The provisions of section 706 (f through (k) , as applicable, shall govern civil actions brought hereunder. "(g) (I) Each United States district court and each United States court of a place sub- ject to the jurisdiction of the United States shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this title. Such an action may be brought in any judicial district in the State in which the unlawful employment practice as alleged to have been committed, in the judicial district in which the employment records relevant to such practice are main- tained and administered, or in the judicial district in which the injured person would have worked but for the alleged unlawful employment practice, but if the respondent is not found within any such district, such an action may be brought within the judicial district in which the respondent has his prin- cipal office. For purposes of sections 1404 and 1406 of title 28 of the United States Code, Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 S 2304 Approved For Reletamm/m8kAywrago_02s9mproi00021,-,4 February 227 1972 the judicial district in which the respondent has his principal office shall in all cases be considered a district in which the action might have been brought. , "(2) If the court finds that the respond- ent has engaged in or is engaging in an un- lawful employment practice charged in the complaint, the court may enjoin the re- spondent from engaging in such unlawful employment practice, and order such affirm- ative action as may be appropriate, which may include, but is not limited to, reinstate- ment or hiring of employees, with or without backpay (payable by the employer, employ- ment agency, or labor organization, as the case may be, responsible for the unlawful employment practice), or any other equitable relief as the court deems appropriate. Back- pay liability shall not exceed that which ac- crues from a date more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission,. Interim earnings or amounts eagnable with reasonable diligence by the person or per- sons discriminated against shall operate to reduce the backpay otherwise allowable," "(b) Subsection (k) of section 706 of such Act is amended to read as follows: "(k) In any action or proceeding under this title the Commission or court, as the case may be, may allow the prevailing peaty, other than the Commission or the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs, and the Commission and the United States shall be liable for costs the same as a private person. Any prevailing party in any proceeding brought by or against the Commission of the United States under this title, that is an employer of less than twenty-five employees or a labor organization of less than twenty-five members shall, upon application to the Commission, be indemni- fied by the United States for the cost of ills defense against the charge in an amount not to exceed $5,000, including all reasonable ex- penses and attorney's fees incurred af Ler the serving of notice on him of the charge. "Any prevailing party in such a proceeding that is an employer of twenty-five to one hundred employees whose average income from such employment is less than$7,500, or a labor organization with twenty-five to one hundred members, shall, upon applica- tion to the Commission, be indemnified by the United States for one-half of the cost of his defense against the charge not to exceed $2,500, including all reasonable expenses aid attorney's fees incurred after the serving of notice on him of the charge. The costs evi- denced by respondent's vouchers of his ex- penses and attorney's fees shall be deemed reasonable so long as they are comparable Lo the total amount of the expenses and attor- ney's fees incurred by the Commission in Investigating and prosecuting the charge. Disallowance of any part of such recntest shall be made a part of the Commission's order in such proceedings. Any United States court before which a proceeding under this title shall be brought may upon request Ly the respondent make the determination pro- vided for in this subsection. The Treasurer of the United States shall indemnify the re- spondent as provided for herein upon certifi- cation by the Commission." SEC. 4A. The fifth sentence of section 706 (f) (1) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the previous section, is amended to read as follows: "Upon timely application, the court may, in its discretion, permit the General Counsel, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, government agency, or political subdivision, to intervene in such civil action if he certifies that the case is of general public importance." SEC. 4B. Section 706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(1) If the judge designated pursuant to subsection (f) (3) of this section has not as- signed the case for trial within one hundred and twenty days after issue has been joined, that judge may appoint a master pursuant to rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proce- dure." SEC. 5. Section 707 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(e) Effective two years after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Oppor- tunities Enforcement Act of 1972, the func- tions of the Attorney General under this section shall be transferred to the Commis- sion, together with such personnel, property, records, and unexpended balances of ,appro- priations, allocations, and other funds em- ployed, used, held, available, or to be made available in connection with such functions unless the President submits, and neither House of Congress vetoes, a reorganization plan pursuant to chapter 9, of title 5, United States Code, inconsistent with the provisions of this subsection. The Commission shall carry out such functions in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) and (c) of this section. "(d) Upon the transfer of functions pro- vided for in subsection. (c) of this section, in all suits commenced pursuant to this sec- tion prior to the date of such transfer, pro- ceedings shall continue without abatement, all court orders and decrees shall remain in effect, and the Commission shall be sub- stituted as a party for the United States of America, the Attorney General, or the Acting Attorney General, as appropriate. "(e) Subsequent to the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunities En- forcement Act of 1972, the Commission shall have authority to investigate and act on a charge of a pattern or practice of discrimina- tion, whether filed by or on behalf of a per- son claiming to be aggrieved or by an officer or employee of the Commission. All such ac- tions shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 706." SEC. 6. (a) Subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 263; 42 U.S.C. 2000e.-8(b)-(d)) are amended to read as follows: "(b) The Commission may cooperate with State and local agencies charged with the administration of State fair employment practices laws and, with the consent of such agencies, may, for the purpose of carrying out Its functions and duties under this title and within the limitation of funds appropriated specifically for Such purpose, engage in and contribute to the cost of research and other projects of mutual interest undertaken by such agencies, and utilize the services of such agencies and their employees, and, notwith- standing any other provision of law, pay by advance or reimbursement such agencies and their employees for services rendered to assist the Commission in carrying out this title. In furtherance of such cooperative efforts, the Commission may enter into written agree- ments with such State or local agencies and such agreements may include provisions under which the Commission shall refrain from processing a charge in any cases or class of cases specified in such agreements or under which the Commission shall relieve any person or class of persons in such State or locality from requirements imposed under this section. The Commission shall rescind any such agreement whenever it determines that the agreement no longer serves the in- terest of effective enforcement of this title. (c) Every employer, employment agency, and labor organization subject to this title shall (1) make and keep such records relevant to the determinations of whether unlawful employment practices have been or are being committed, (2) preserve such records for such periods, and (3) make such reports therefrom as the Commission shall prescribe by regulation or order, after public hearing, as reasonable, necessary, or appropriate for the enforcement of this title or the regula- tions or orders thereunder. The Commission shall, by regulation, require each employer, labor organization, and joint labor-manage- ment committee subject to this title which controls an apprenticeship or other training program to maintain such records as are rea- sonably necessary to carry out the purposes of this title, including, but not limited to, a list of applicants who wish to participate in such program, including the chronological order in which applications were received, and to furnish to the Commission upon re- quest, a detailed description of the manner in which persons are selected to participate in the apprenticeship or other training pro- gram. Any employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor manage- ment committee which believes that the application to it of any regulation or order issued under this section would result in undue hardship may apply to the Commis- sion for an exemption from the application of such regulation or order, and, if such ap- plication for an exemption is denied, bring a civil action in the United States district court for the district where such records are kept. If the Commission or the court, as the case may be, finds that the application of the regulation or order to the employer, employ- ment agency, or labor organization in ques- tion would impose an undue hardship, the Commission or the court, as the case may be, may grant appropriate relief. If any person required to comply with the provisions of this subsection fails or refuses to do so, the United States district court for the district in which such person is found, resides, or transacts business, shall, upon application of the Com- mission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency or political subdivision, have juris- diction to issue to such person an order re- quiring him to comply. "(d) In prescribing requirements pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the Com- mission shall consult with other interested State and Federal agencies and shall en- deavor to coordinate its requirements with those adopted by such agencies. The Com- mission shall furnish upon request and with- out cost to any State or meal agency charged with the administration of a fair employ- ment practice law information obtained pur- suant to subsection (c) of this section from any employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee subject to the jurisdiction of such agency. Such information shall be furnished on condition that it not be made public by the recipient agency prior to the institution of a proceeding under State or local law in- volving such information. If this condition is violated by a recipient agency, the Commis- sion may decline to honor subsequent re- quests pursuant to this subsection." (b) Section 709 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended by: (1) redesignating sub- section (e) as subsection (f) and (2) by adding immediately after section 709(d) as amended, the following subsection (e) "(e) Any record or paper required by sec- tion 709(c) of this title to be preserved or maintained shall be made available for in- spection, reproduction, and copying by the Commission or its representative, or by the Attorney General or his representative, upon demand in writing directed to the person having custody, possession, or control of such record or paper. Unless otherwise ordered by a court of the United States, neither the members of the Commission or its rep- resentative nor the Attorney General or his representative shall disclose any record or paper produced pursuant to this title, or any reproduction or copy, except to Con- gress or any committee thereof, or to a gov- ernmental agency, or in the presentation of any case or proceeding before any court or grand jury. The United States district court for the district in which a demand is made or in which a record or paper so demanded is located, shall have jurisdiction to compel Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 -FebrItary 22, gfigifiaved For finifilleEFOTINfef89118 ReaGOOP7-31116b4M000400100021-4 S 2305 by appropriate process the production of such record or paper." SEC. 7. Section 710 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 264; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-9) is amended to read as follows: "INVESTIGATORY POWERS "SEC. 710. For the purpose of all hearings and investigations conducted by the Com- mission or its duly authorized agents or agencies, section 11 of the National Labor Relations Act (49 Stat. 455 29 U.S.C. 161) shall apply." SEC. 8. (a) Section 703(a) (2) of the Civil Rights Act of 1961 (78 Stat. 255; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a) (2)) is amended by inserting the words "or applicants for employment" after the words "his employees". (b) Section 703(c) (2) of such Act is amended by inserting the words "or appli- cants for membership" after the word "mem- bership". (c) (1) Section 704(a) of such Aet is amended by inserting "or joint labor- management committee controlling appren- ticeship or other training or retraining, in- cluding on-the-job training programs," after "employment agency" in section 704(a). (2) Section 704(b) of such Act is amended by (A) striking out "or employment agency" and inserting in lieu thereof "employment agency, or joint labor-management commit- tee controlling apprenticeship or other train- ing or retraining, including on-the-job training programs,", and (B) inserting a comma and the words "or relating to ad- mission to, or employment in, any program established to provide . apprenticeship or other training by such a joint labor-manage- Ment committee" before the word "indicat- ing". (d) Section 705(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (785 Stat. 258, 42 U.S.C. 200e-4(a) ) is amended to read as follows: "Sac. 705. (a) There is hereby created a Commission to be known as the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission, which shall be composed of five members, unless additional members are appointed as herein- after provided in this subsection. Not more than the least number of members sufficient to constitute a majority of the members of the Commission shall be members of the same political party. Members of the Com- mission shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice and Consent of the Senate for a term of five years. Any indi- vidual chosen to fill a vacancy shall be ap- pointed only for the unexpired term of the member whom he shall succeed, and all members of the Commission shall continue to serve until their successors are appointed and qualified, except that no such member of the Commission shall continue to serve (1) for more than sixty days when the Con- gress is in session unless a nomination to fill such vacancy shall have been submitted to the Senate, or (2) after the adjournment sine die of the session of the Senate in which such nomination was submitted. The Presi- dent shall designate one member to serve as Chairman of the Commission, and one mem- ber to serve as Vice Chairman. The Chair- man shall be responsible on behalf of the Commission for the administrative opera- tions of the Commission, and, except as pro- vided in subsection (b), shall appoint, in accordance with the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, such officers, agents, attorneys, hearing examiners, and employees, except that regional directors of the Commission shall be appOinted by the Chairman with the Concurrence of the Gen- eral Counsel, as he deems necessary to assist it in the performance of its functions and to fix their compensation in accordance with the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates: Provided, That assign- ment, removal, and compensation of hearing examiners shall be in accordance with sec- tions 3105, 3344, 5362, and 7521 of title 5, United States Code. At any time after one year from the effective date of the Equal Employment Opportunities Enforcement Act of 1972, the Chairman of the Commission, if he determines that the appointment of addi- tional members of the Commission would help to effectuate the purposes of this title, may request the President to appoint up to four additional members of the Commission. Upon receiving such a request, the President may appoint up to four additional members of the Commission by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Such additional members shall be appointed for a term of five years. Upon the expiration of the term of appointment of any such additional member no further appointment to the same position shall be made, and the total number of mem- bers of the Commission shall be reduced ac- cordingly unless the Chairman of the Com- mission determines that the appointment of one or more additional members of the Com- mission continues to be necessary to better effectuate the purposes of this title and so advises the President." (c) (1) Section 705 of the Act is amended by inserting the following new subsection (b) : "(b) There shall be a General Counsel of the Commission appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a term of four years. The General Counsel shall have responsibility for the fil- ing of complaints and the conduct of litiga- tion as provided in sections 706 and 707 of this title, The General Counsel shall have such other duties as the Commission may prescribe or as may be provided by law. The General Counsel shall appoint regional at- torneys with the concurrence of the chair- man, and shall appoint such other employees in the Office of the General Counsel as may be necessary to assist in carrying out the General Counsel's responsibilities and func- tions under this title. The General Counsel of the Commission on the effective date of this Act shall continue in such position and perform the functions specified in this sub- section until a successor is appointed and qulifled." (2) Subsections (b) through (j) of section 705 of such Act are redesignated as subsec- tions (c) through (k), respectively. (f) Section 705(h) (1) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end thereof the following: ", and to accept voluntary and uncompensated services, for the limited pur- pose of publicizing in the media the Com- mission and its activities notwithstanding the provisions of section 3679(b) of the Revised Statutes (31 U.S.C. 665 (b) )". (g) Section '705(h) (6) of such Act, as redesignated by this section, is amended to read as follows: "(6) to intervene in a civil action brought by an aggrieved party under section 706." (h) Section 713 of such Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsections: "(c) Except for the rulemaking power as defined in subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, with reference to gen- eral rules as distinguished from rules of specific applicability, and the power to enter into or rescind agreements with State and local agencies, as provided in subsection (b) of section 709, under which the Commission agrees to refrain from processing a charge in any cases or class of cases or under which the Commission agrees to relieve any person or class of persons in such State or locality from requirements imposed by section 709, the Commission may 'delegate any of its functions, duties, and powers to such person or persons as the Commission may designate by regulation, including functions, .duties, and powers with respect to hearing, deter- mining, ordering, certifying, reporting or otherwise acting as to any work, business, or matter. Nothing in this subsection authorizes the Commission to provide for persons other than those referred to in clauses (2) and (3) of subsection (b) of section 556 of title 5 of the United States Code to conduct any hear- ing to which that section applies. "(d) The Commission is authorized to dele- gate to any group of three or more members of the Commission any or all of the powers which it may itself exercise." (i) Section '714 of such Act is amended by striking out "section 11" and inserting in lieu thereof "sections 111 and 1114". SEC. 9. (a) Section 5314 of title 5 of the United States Code is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: "(58) Chairman, Equal Employment Op- portunity Commission." (b) Clause (72) of section 5315 of such title Is amended to read as follows: "(72) Members, Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission (8)." (c) Clause (111) of section 5316 of such title is repealed. , (d) Section 5316 of such title is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: "(131) General Counsel of the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission." SEC. 10. Section 715 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended to read as follows: "Sac. 715. There shall be established an Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinat- ing Council (hereinafter referred to in this paragraph as the Council) composed of the Secretary of Labor, the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion, the Attorney General, and the Chair- man of the United States Civil Rights Com- mission, or their respective delegates. The Council shall have the responsibility for de- veloping and implementing agreements, pol- icies and practices designed to maximize ef- fort, promote efficiency, and eliminate con- flict, competition, duplication and incon- sistency among the operations, functions and jurisdictions of the various departments, agencies and branches of the Federal Gov- ernment responsible for the implementation and enforcement of equal employment op- portunity legislation, orders, and policies. On or before July 1 of each year, the Council shall transmit to the President and to the Congress a report of its activities, together with such recommendations for legislative or administrative changes as it concludes are desirable to further promote the purposes of this section." SEC. 11. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1961 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e at seq.) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT "Sac. 717. (a) All personnel actions affect- ing employees or applicants for employment (except with regard to aliens employed out- side the limits of the United States) in military departments as defined in section 102 of title 5, United States Code, in execu- tive agencies (other than the General Ac- counting Office) as defined in section 105 of title 5, United States Code (including em- ployees and applicants for employment who are paid from nonappropriated funds), in the United States Postal Service and the Postal Rate Commission, in those units of the Government of the District of Columbia having positions in the competitive service, and in4those units 91. the legislative and ju- dicial branches of The Federal Government having positions in the competitive service, 4and in the Library of Congressyshall be made free from any discrimination-based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. "(b), Except as otherwise provided in this subsection,: the Civil Service Commission , shall have authority to enforce the provi- sions of subsection (a) through appropriate remedies, including reinstatement or hiring of employees with or without back pay, as will effectuate the policies of this section, Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 S 2306 Approved For EektsRACI19R2p it9R7alep_gpRiM0004001V9VRitry zz 1972- and shall issue such rules, regulations, or- ders and instructions as it deems necessary grid appropriate to carry out its responsibili- ties under this section. The Civil Service Commission shall? '(1) be responsible for the annual review and approval of a national and regional equal employment opportunity plan which each department and agency and each ap- propriate unit referred to in section 717 (a) shall submit in order to maintain an affirma- tive program of equal employment opportu- nity for all such employees and applicants for employment; "(2) be responsible for the review and evaluation of the operation of all agency equal employment opportunity programs, pe- riodically obtaining and publishing (on at least a semiannual basis) progress reports from each such department, agency, or unit; and "(3) consult with and solicit the recom- mendations of interested individuals, groups, and organizations relating to equal employ- ment opportunity. The head of each such department, agency, or unit shall comply with such rules, regu- lations, orders, and instructions which shall include a provision that an employee or ap- plicant for employment shall be notified of any final action taken on any complaint of discrimination filed by him thereunder. The plan submitted by each department, agency, and unit shall include, but not be limited to? (1) provisions for the establishment of training and education programs designed to provide a maximum opportunity for em- ployees to advance so as to perform at their highest potential; and "(2) a description of the qualifications in terms of training and experience relating to equal employment opportunity for the prin- cipal and operating officials of each such de- partment, agency, or unit responsible for carrying out the equal employment oppor- tunity program and of the allocation of per- sonnel and resources proposed by such de- partment, agency, or unit to carry out its equal employment opportunity program. With respect to employment in the Library of Congress, authorities granted in this stb- section to the Civil Service Commission shall be exercised by the Librarian of Congress. "(c) Within thirty days of receipt of notice of final action taken by a department, agency, or unit referred to in subsection 717 (a), or by the Civil Service Commission upon an appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency, or unit on a complaint of discrimination based on race, 'color, reli- gion, sex or national origin, brought pursu- ant to subsection (a) of this section, Ex- ecutive Order 11478 or any succeeding execu- tive orders, or after one hundred and eighty days from the filing of the initial charge with the department, agency, or unit or with the Civil Service Commission on appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency, or unit until such time as final action may be taken by a department, agency, or unit, an employee or applicant for employment, if aggrieved by the anal disposition of his com- plaint, or by the failure to take final action on his complaint, may file a civil action as provided in section 70G. in which civil ac- tion the head of the department, agency, or unit, as appropriate, shall be the defendant. "(d) The provisions of section 706(f) through (k), as applicable, shall govern civil actions brought hereunder. "(e) Nothing contained in this Act shall relieve any Government agency or official of Its or his primary responsibility to assure nondiscrimination in employment as re- quired by the Constitution and statutes or of its or his responsibilities under Executive Order 11478 relating to equal employment o,:portunity in the Federal Government." SEC. 12. Section 716 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000(e)-15, 78 Stat. 266) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(d) In the performance of their respon- sibilities under this Act, the Attorney Gen- eral, the Chairman of the Civil Service Com- mission and the Chairman of the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission shall consult regarding their rules, regulations, and policies." SEC. 13. Section 5108(c) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by? (1) striking out the word "and" at the end of paragraph (9); (2) striking out the period at the end of paragraph (10) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and the word "and"; and (3) by adding immediately after paragraph (10) the last time it appears therein the following new paragraph: "(11) the Chairman of the Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission, subject to the standards and procedures prescribed by this chapter, may place an additional ten positions in the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission in GS-16, G$-17, and GS-18 for the purposes of carrying out title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1961." SEC. 14. The amendments made by this Act to section 706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 shall be applicable with respect to charges pending with the Commission on the date of enactment of this Act and all charges filed thereafter. SEC. 15, No Government contract, or por- tion thereof, with any employer, shall be denied, withheld, terminated, or suspended, by any agency or officer of the United States under any equal employment opportunity law or order, where such employer has an affirmative action plan which has previously been accepted by the Government for the same facility within the past twelve months without first according such employer full hearing and adjudication under the provi- sions of title 5, United States Code, section 554, and the following pertinent sections: Provided, That if such employer has de- viated substantially from such previously agreed to affirmative action plan, this section shall not apply: Provided further, That for the purposes of this section an affirmative ac- tion plan shall be deemed to have been ac- cepted by the Government at the time the appropriate compliance agency has accepted such plan unless within forty-five days there- after the Office of Federal Contract Compli- ance has disapproved such plan. " SEC. 16. The Chairman of the United States Civil Service Commission, or his delegate, shall be a member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council estab- lished by section 715 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by this Act. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous unanimous-consent agree- ment, the Senate will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1746, which the clerk will state. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (H.R 1746) to further promote equal opportunity for American workers. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the agreement, all after the enacting clause is stricken, and the language of S. 2515 as passed by the Senate is sub- stituted therefor. The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and th bill to be read a third time. The bill was read the third time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall it pass? On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. I an- nounce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. BAYH) . the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT) , the Senator from In- diana (Mr. HARTKE) , the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) , the Sena- tor from Arkansas (Mr. MCCLELLAN) , the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. McGovERN), and the Senator from Maine (Mr. Muslos) are necessarily absent. I further announced that, if present and voting, the Senator from Axkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT) , the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. McGovsaN), and the Senator from Maine (Mr. MusKis) would each vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER) is absent by leave of the Senate on official committee business. The Senator from Wyoming (Mr. HAN- SEN) and the Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER) are necessarily absent. The Senator from South Dakota (Mr. MUNDT) is absent because of illness. The result was announced?yeas 72, nays 17, as follows: [No. 57 Leg.] YEAS-72 Aiken Allott Anderson Beall Bellmon Bennett Bentsen Bible Boggs Brooke Burdick Byrd, W. Va. Cannon Case Chiles Church Cook Cooper Cotton Cranston Curtis Dole Dominick Eagleton Allen Brock Buckley Byrd, Va. Eastland Ellender Baker Bayh Fulbright. Hansen Fong Gambrell Gravel Griffin Gurney Harris Hart Hatfield Hollings Hruska Hughes Humphrey Inouye Javits Jordan, Idaho Kennedy Magnuson Mansfield Mathias McGee McIntyre Metcalf Mondale Montoya NAYS-17 Ervin Fannin Goldwater Jordan, N.C. Long Sparkman NOT VOTING-11 Hartke Miller Jackson Mundt McClellan 11(Cuskie McGovern Moss Nelson Packwood Pastore Pearson Pell Percy Proxmire Randolph Ribicoff Roth Saxbe Schweiker Scott Smith Spong Stafford Stevens Stevenson Symington Taft Tunney Weicker Williams Stennis Talmadge Thurmond Tower Young So the bill (H.R. 1746) was passed. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that in the engross- ment of the Senate amendments to H.R. 1746, the Secretary of the Senate be authorized to make necessary technical and clerical corrections. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ROTH). Without objection, it is so or- dered. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that HR. 1746 as amended by the Senate be printed as passed. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I simply wish to extend the gratitude of the Senate to the distinguished Senator Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Re ieeemcftyggymignitwuRvao2ivitggp400 00021-4 March 2, 1972 JOURNME'NT OVER TO MONDAY NEXT M BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani- mous onsent that when the House ad- journs oday it adjourn to meet on Mon- day nex The S EAKER. Without objection, it is so orde d. There w no objection. DISPENSIN I WITH CALENDAR WEDNESD Y BUSINESS ON WEDNESDA NEXT Mr. BOGGS. . Speaker, I ask unani- mous consent tha the business in order under the calends Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday of next week, March 8. The SPEAKER. Is here objection to the request of the entleman from Louisiana? There was no objectio CORRECTION OF OTE Mr. MONAGAN. Mr. Spea er, I am in- formed that on the last rollc 1 of today I am recorded as not voting, was pres- ent in the Chamber and vote "yea." I ask unanimous consent that th RECORD be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objec on to the request of the gentleman rom Connecticut? There was no objection. CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1746, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTU- NITY ACT OF 1972 Mr. PERKINS submitted the follow- ing conference report and statement on the bill (H.R. 1746) to further pro- mote equal employment opportunities for American workers: CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. No. 92-899) The committee of conference on the dis- agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 1746). An Act to further promote equal em- ployment opportunities for American work- ers, having met, after full and free confer- ence, have agreed to recommend and do rec- ommend to their respective Houses as fol- lows: That the House recede from its disagree- ment to the amendment of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate amendment insert the following: That this Act may be cited as the "Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972". SEC. 2. Section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e) is amended as follows: (1) In subsection (a) insert "govern- ments, governmental agencies, political sub- divisions," after the word "individuals". (2) Subsection (b) is amended to read as follows: '(b) The term 'employer' means a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce Who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calen- dar weeks in the current or preceding calen- dar year, and any agent of such a person, but such term does not include (1) the United States, a corporation wholly owned by the Government of the United States, an Indian tribe, or any department or agency of the District of Columbia subject by stat- ute to procedures of the competitive service (as defined in section 2102 of title 5 of the United States Code), or (2) a bona fide pri- vate membership club (other than a labor organization) which is exempt from taxation under section 501 (c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, except that during the first year after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, per- sons having fewer than twenty-five em- ployees (and their agents) shall not be con- sidered employers." (3) In subsection (c) beginning with the semicolon strike out through the word "as- sistance". (4) In subsection (e) strike out between "(A)" and "and such labor organization", and insert in lieu thereof "twenty-five or more during the first year after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972, or (B) fifteen or more thereafter,". (6) In subsection (f), insert before the period a comma and the following: "except that the term 'employee' shall not include any person elected to public office in any State or political subdivision of any State by the qualified voters thereof, or any person chosen by such officer to be on such officer's personal staff, or an appointee on the policy making level or an immediate adviser with respect to the exercise of the constitutional or legal powers of the office. The ekemption set forth in the preceding sentence shall not include employees subject to the civil service laws of a State government, govern- mental agency or political subdivision." (6) At the end of subsection (h) insert before the period a comma and the follow- ing: "and further includes any governmental industry, business, or activity". (7) After subsection (1) insert the follow- ing new subsection (j) : '(j) The term 'religion' includes all as- pects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer dem- onstrates that he is unable to reasonably ac- commodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business." SEC. 3. Section 702 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 255; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-1) is amended to read as follows: "EXEMPTION "SEC. 702. This title shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious cor- poration, association, educational institu- tion, or society with respect to the employ- ment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carry- ing on by such corporation, association, edu- cational institution, or society of its activi- ties." SEC. 4. (a) Subsections (a) through (g) of section 706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 259; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5 (a)-(g) ) are amended to read as follows: "SEC. 705. (a) The Commission is empow- ered, as hereinafter provided, to prevent any person from engaging in any unlawful em- ployment practice as set forth in section 703 or 701 of this title. "(b) Whenever a charge is filed by or on be- half of a person claiming to be aggrieved, or by a member of the Commission, alleging that an employer employment agency, la- bor organization, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on- the-job- training programs, has engaged in an unlawful employment practice, the Com- mission shall serve a notice of the charge (in- cluding the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice) on such employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-manage- ment committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent') within ten days, and shall make an investigation thereof. Charges shall be in writing under oath or affirmation and shall contain such information and be in such form as the Commission requires. Charges shall not be made public by the Commission. If the Commission determines after such investigation that there is not reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, it shall dismiss the charge and promptly notify the person claiming to be aggrieved and the respondent of its action. In determining whether reasonable cause exists, the Commission shall accord substan- tial weight to fint4 findings and orders made by State or local authorities in proceedings commenced under State or local law pursu- ant to the requirements of subsections (c) and (d). If the Commission determines after such investigation that there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, the Commission shall endeavor to eliminate any such alleged unlawful employment practice by informal methods of conference, concilia- tion, and persuasion. Nothing said or done during and as a part of such informal en- deavor may be made public by the Commis- sion, its officers or employees, or used as evi- dence in a sv.bsequent proceeding without the written consent of the persons concerned. Any person who makes public information in violation of this subsection shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. The Commission shall make its determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, so far as prac- ticable, not later than one hundred and twenty days from the filing of the charge or, where applicable under subsection (c) or (d), from the date upon which the Com- mission is authorized to take action with respect to the charge. "(c) In the case of an alleged unlawful employment practice occurring in a State, or political subdivision of a State, which has a State or local law prohibiting the unlaw- ful employment practice alleged and estab- lishing or authorizing a State or local au- thority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, no charge may be filed under subsec- tion (a) by the person aggrieved before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State or local law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated, provided that such sixty- day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State or local law. If any requirement for the commencement of such proceedings is imposed by a State or local authority other than a requirement of the filing of a written and signed statement of the facts upon which the proceeding is based, the proceeding shall be deemed to have been commenced for the purposes of this subsection at the time such statement is sent by registered mall to the appropriate State or local authority. "(d) In the case of any charge filed by a member of the Commission alleging an un- lawful employment practice occurring in a State or political subdivision of a State which has a State or local law prohibiting the prac- tice alleged and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or seek re- lief from such practice or to institute crimi- nal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, the Commis- sion shall, before taking any action with re- spect to such charge, notify the appropriate State or local officials and, upon request, af- ford them a reasonable time, but not less than sixty days (provided that such sixty- day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective day of such State or local law), unless a shorter period is requested, to act under such State or local law to remedy the practice alleged. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 ? CJArRDenalfi296R000400100021-4 March 2, 1972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? tiou Rooney, Pa. Rosenthal Roush Rousselot Roy Roybal Ruppe Ruth Ryan St Germain Sandman Sarbanes Satterfield Saylor Scherle Scheuer Schneebeli Schwengel Scott Sebelius Seiberling Shriver Sikes Sisk Skubitz Slack Smith, Calif. Smith, Iowa Smith, N.Y. Bennett Crane de la Garza Duncan Findley Anderson, Tenn. Andrews .Annunzio Ashbrook Baring Blatnik Brasco Camp Carey, N.Y. Chisholm Clay Collins, Ill. Dwyer Eckhardt Edwards, La. Frey Galiflanakis Goldwater Grasso Snyder Spence Staggers Stanton. J. William Stanton, James V. Steed Steele Steiger, Ariz. Steiger, Wis. Stratton Stuckey Sullivan Symington Talcott Wrig Taylor Wyatt , Teague, Calif. Wydler Teague, Tex. Wylie Terry Wyman Thompson, Ga. Yates Thompson. N.J. Yatron Thomson, Wis. Young, Fla. Young, Tex. Zablocki Zion Zwach Waggonner Waldie Ware Whalen Whalley White Whitehurst Whitten . Widnall Wiggins Williams Wilson, Charles H. Winn Worft Thone Udall Ullman Van Deerlin Vander'Jagt Vigorito NAYS-14 Flynt Gross Hall Mathis. Ga. Nichols NOT VOTING-57 Rarick Robinson, Va. Runnels Schmitz Hebert Jonas Kemp Kluczyriskl Kyros Landgrebe Latta Long, Md. McCloskey McDonald, Mich. McMillan Macdonald, Mass. Madden Mann Martin Metcalfe Mitchell Morgan O'Hara O'Neill Poage Powell Pryor, Ark. Pucinski Purcell Riegle Rostenkowski Shipley Shoup Springer Stephens Stokes Stubblefield Tiernan Vanik Veysey Warnpler Wilson, Bob and development, to remove the termi- nation date thereof, and for other pur- poses." A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the pro- visions of House Resolution 850, the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce is discharged from further consideration of the bill S. 979. The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill. - MOTION OFFERED BY MR. STAGGERS Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion. The Clerk read as follows: ' MT. STAGGERS moves to strike out all after \ \Ilk the enacting clauseof the bill S. 979 and insert In lieu thereof the provisions of . 11384, as passed. e motion was agreed to. Th Senate bill was ordered to be read a thir time, was read the third time, and p The tit was amended so as to read: "A bill to end the Act of September 30, 1965, re ting to high-speed ground transportatio to enlarge the authority of the Secreta to undertake research and development, to remove the termina- tion date thereo and for other pur- poses.". A motion to recons er was laia on the table. ' A similar House bill .R. 11384) was laid on the table. So the bill was passed. The Clerk announced the following pairs: Mr. O'Neill with Mr. Andrews. Mr. Stokes with Mr. Blatnik. Mr. Annunzio with Mr. Bob Wilson. Mr. Brasco with Mr. Goldwater. Mr. Rostenkowski with Mr. McDonald of Michigan. Mr. Hebert with Mr. Martin. Mr. Carey of New York with Mr. Clay. Mr. Kluczynski with Mr. Springer. Mr. Collins of Illinois with Mr. Kyros. Mr. Macdonald of Massachusetts with Mr. Kemp. Mr. Stubblefield with Mr. Ashbrook. Mr. Tiernan with Mr. Camp. Mr. O'Hara with Mrs. Chisholm. Mr. Long of Maryland with Mr. Metcalfe. Mr. Shipley with Mr. Frey. Mr. Stephens with Mr. Landgrebe. Mr. Anderson of Tennessee with Mr. Latta. Mr. Eckhardt with Mr. McCloskey. Mr. Purcell with Mr. Riegle. Mrs. Grasso with Mrs. Dwyer. Mr. Vanik with Mr. Powell. Mr. Mann with Mr. Jones. Mr. Mitchell with Mr. Baring. Mr. Pucinski with Mr. Shoup. Mr. Madden with Mr. Veysey. Mr. Morgan with Mr. Wampler. Mr. McMillan with Mr. Galifianakls. Mr. CONYERS changed his vote from "nay" to "yea." The title was amended so as to read: "A bill to amend the Act of September 30, 1965, relating to high-speed ground transportation, to enlarge the authority of the Secretary to undertake research GENERAL LEA Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Spea er, I ask unanimous consent that all embers have 5 legislative days in whic to ex- tend their remarks on the bi just passed. The SPEAKER. Is there objectio the request of the gentleman from Virginia? There was no objection. CORRECTION OF ROLLCALL Mr. BIAGGI. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 53, on February 29, a quorum call, I am recorded as absent. I was present and answered to my name. I ask unanimous consent that the permanent RECORD and Journal be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York? There was no objection. CORRECTION OF VOTE Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Speaker, on roll- call No. 60 I am recorded as not voting. I was present and voted "yea." I ask unanimous consent that the RECORD be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio? There was no objection. LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM (Mr. GERALD R. FORD asked and was given permission tp address the House for 1 minute.) Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for the purpose of asking if 1693 the distinguished majority leader the program for the remainder of the week, if any, and the schedule for next week. Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, will the dis- tinguished gentleman yield? Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana. Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, in reply to the distinguished minority leader, this completes the program for this week, and I shall ask unanimous consent to go over until Monday after adjournment today. The program for next week is as follows: Monday there will be a call of the Con- sent Calendar, to be followed by con- sideration of nine suspensions, as fol- lows: S. 1975, minimum age for Federal court jurors; H.R. 2589, jury qualification form change; Senate Joint Resolution 190, Commis- sion on the Bankruptcy Laws Terms Extension; Ha. 12828, veterans' education and training amendments; S. 860, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; H.R. 12749, saline water conversion program; H.R. 10390, Indian Claims Commis- sion; H.R. 8763, Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area; and H.R. 10834, authorizing Alaska to op- erate a ferry. Tuesday there will be a call of the Private Calendar, and also a motion to send to conference S. 659, the Omnibus Education Amendments of 1972, with Senate amendment thereto. For Wednesday and the balance of the week there will be consideration of the following: H.R. 11624, Transpo 72 at Dulles Air- port, authorization, subject to a rule be- ing granted; H.R. 1746, Equal Employment Oppor- unities Act, a conference report; and H.R. 10420, Marine Mammal Protec- th Act, subject to a rule being granted. nference reports, of course, may be call up 'at any time, and any further prog m will be announced later. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentle n yield? Mr. G R. FORD. I yield to the gentlema from Iowa. Mr. GRs SS. I thank the gentleman for yielding What is th future for that long list of Member bills hich were killed off yes- terday or th day before yesterday, whichever it w s? Mr. BOGGS. am unable to answer the gentleman's i quiry. I have not dis- cussed the matter ith the distinguished chairman of the W s and Means Com- mittee. I would thin that the gentleman would be free to call em up again un- der unanimous consen or, if necessary, to obtain rules. I would not want to low down any presidential candidate's c paign, but it might be helpful to know ?oon as pos- sible when we are going to be faced with that bunch of bills. The gentleman might notiee they are not called up for next Tuesday,, at any rate. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 2, 19 7APproved For lIcjimackgggitgai :atiglitB7_34M?Et000400100021-4 (e) A charge under this section shall be filed within one hundred and eighty days after the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice occurred and notice of the charge (in- cluding the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment practice) shall be served upon the person against whom such charge is made within ten days there- after, except that in a case of an unlawful employment practice with respect to which the person aggrieved has initially instituted proceedings with a State or local agency with authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, such charge shall be filed by or on be- half of the person aggrieved within three hundred days after the alleged unlawful em- ployment practice occurred, or within thirty days after receiving notice that the State or local agency has terminated the proceedings under the State or local law, whichever is earlier, and a copy of such charge shall be filed by the Commission with the State or local agency. ? "(f) (1) If within thirty days after a charge is filed with the Commission or within thirty days after expiration of any period of reference under subsection (c) or (d). the Commission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation agreement ac- ceptable to the Commission, the Commis- sion may bring a civil action against any respondent not a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision named in the charge. In the case of a respondent which Is a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision, if the Commission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation agreement acceptable to the Commission, the Commission shall take no further action and shall refer the case to the Attorney General who may bring a civil ac- tion against such respondent in the appro- priate United States district court. The per- son or persons aggrieved shall have the right to intervene in a civil action brought by the Commission or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agen- cy, or political subdivision. If a charge filed with the Commission pursuant to subsection (b) is dismissed by the Commission, or if within one hundred and eighty days from the filing of such charge or the expiration of any period of reference under subsection (c) or (d), whichever is later, the Commis- sion has not filed a civil action under this section or the Attorney General has not filed a civil action in a ,case involving a govern- ment, governmental agency, or political sub- division, or the Commission has not entered into a conciliation agreement to which the person aggrieved is a party, the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency, or po- litical subdivision, shall so notify the person aggrieved and within ninety days after the giving of such notice a civil action may be brought against the respondent named in the charge (A) by the person claiming to be aggrieved or (B) if such charge was filed by , a member of the Commission, by any person whom the charge alleges was aggrieved by the alleged unlawful employment practice. Up- on application by the complainant and in such circumstances as the court may deem just, the court may appoint an attorney for such complainant and may authorize the commencement of the action without the payment of fees, costs, or security. Upon timely application, the court may, in its discretion, permit the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a gov- ernment, governmental agency, or political subdivision, to intervene in such civil action upon certification that the case is of general public importance. Upon request, the court may, in its discretion, stay further proceed- ings for not more than sixty days pending the termination of State or local proceedings described in subsections (c) or (d) of this section or further efforts of the Commission to obtain voluntary compliance. "(2) Whenever a charge is flied with the Commission and the Commission concludes on the basis of a preliminary investigation that prompt judicial action is necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, the Com- mission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agen- cy, or political subdivision, may bring an aclion for appropriate 'temporary or prelim- inary relief pending final disposition of such charge. Any temporary restraining order or other order granting preliminary or tempo- rary relief shall be issued in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proce- dure. It shall be the duty of a court having jurisdiction over proceedings under this sec- tion to assign cases for hearing at the earliest practicable date and to cause such cases to be in every way expedited. "(3) Each United States district court and each United States court of a place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States shall have jurisdiction of actions brought' under this title. Such an action may be brought In any judicial district in the State in which the unlawful employment practice is alleged to have been committed, in the judicial dis- trict in which the employment records rele- vant to such practice are maintained and ad- ministered, or in the judicial district in which the aggrieved person would have worked but for the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice, but if the respondent is not found within any such district, such an action may be brought within the judicial district in which the respondent has his principal office. For purposes of section 1404 and 1406 of title 28 of the United States Code, the judi- cial district in which the respondent has his principal office shall in all cases be con- sidered a district in which the action might have been brought. "(4) It shall be the duty of the chief judge of the district (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) in which the case is pending immediately to designate a judge in such district to hear and determine the case. In the event that no judge in the district is available to hear and determine the case, the chief judge of the district, or the acting chief judge, as the case n.ay be, shall certify this fact to the chief judge of the circuit (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) who shall then designate a district or circuit judge of the circuit to hear and determine the case. "(5) It shall be the duty of the judge designated pursuant to this subsection to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date and to cause the case to be in every way expedited. If such Judge has not scheduled the case for trial within one hun- dred and twenty days after issue has been Joined, that judge may appoint a master pursuant to rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. "(g) If the court finds that the respondent has intentionally engaged in or is inten- tionally engaging in an unlawful employ- ment practice charged in the complaint, the court may enjoin the respondent from en- gaging in such unlawful employment prac- tice, and order such affirmative action as may be appropriate, which may include, but Is not limited to, reinstatement or hiring of employees, with or without back pay (pay- able, by the employer, employment agency, or labor organization, as the case may be, responsible for the unlawful employment practice), or any other equitable relief as the court deems appropriate. Back pay liabil- ity shall not accrue from a date more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission. Interim earnings or amounts earnable with reasonable diligence by the person or persons discriminated against shall operate to reduce the back pay otherwise allowable. No order of the court shall require the admission or reinstate- ment of an individual as a member of a 11 1695 union, or the hiring, reinstatement, or promotion of an individual as an employee, or the payment to him of any back pay, if such individual was refused admission, sus- pended, or expelled, or was refused employ- ment or advancement or was suspended or discharged for any reason other than dis- crimination on account of race, color, reli- gion, sex, or national origin or in violation of section 704 (a) ." (b) (1) Subsection (1) of section 706 of such Act is amended by striking out "sub- section (e)" and inserting in lieu thereof "this section". (2) Subsection (j) of such section is amended by striking out "subsection (e)" and inserting in lieu thereof "this section". SEC. 5. Section 707 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(c) Effective two years after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972, the functions of the At- torney General under this section shall be transferred to the Commission, together with such personnel, property, records, and un- expended balances of appropriations, alloca- tions, and other funds employed, used, held, available, or to be made available in connec- tion with such functions unless the President submits, and neither House of Congress vetoes, a reorganization plan pursuant to chapter 9 of title 5, United States Code, in- consistent with the provisions of this sub- section. The Commission shall carry out such functions in accordance with subsection (d) and (e) of this section. "(d) Upon the transfer of functions pro- vided for in subsection (c) of this section in all suits commenced pursuant to this section prior to the date of such transfer, proceed- ings shall continue without abatement, all court orders and decrees shall remain in ef- fect, and the Commission shall be substi- tuted as a party for the United States of America, the Attorney General, or the Act- ing Attorney General, as appropriate. "(e) Subsequent to the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, the Commission shall have authority to investigate and act ,on a charge of a pattern or practice of discrimination, whether filed by or on behalf of a person claiming to be aggrieved or by a member of the Commis- sion. All such actions shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 706 of this Act." SEC. 6. Subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 263; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-8 (b)-(d) ) are amended to read as follows: "(b) The Commission may cooperate with State and local agencies charged with the administration of State fair employment practices laws and, with the consent of such agencies, may, for the purpose of wrying out its functions and duties under this title and within the limitation of funds appro- priated specifically for such purpose, engage in and contribute to the cost of research and other projects of mutual interest undertaken by such agencies, and utilize the services of such agencies and their employees, and, not- withstanding any other provision of law, pay by advance or reimbursement such agen- cies and their employees for services ren- dered to assist the Commission in Carrying out this title. In furtherance of such cooper- ative efforts, the Commission may enter into written agreements with such State or local agencies and such agreements may include provisions under which the Commission shall refrain from processing a charge in any cases or class of cases specified in such agreements or under which the Commission shall relieve any person or class of persons in such State or locality from requirements imposed under this section. The Commission shall rescind any such agreement whenever it determines that the agreement no longer serves the in- terest f effective enforcement of this title. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1696 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?HOUSE March 2, 197A "(c) Every employer, employment agency, and labor organization subject to this title shall (1) make and keep such records, rele- vant to the determinations of whether un- lawful employment practices have been or are being committed, (2) preserve such rec- ords for such periods, and (8) make such re- ports therefrom as the Commission shall pre- scribe by regulation or order, after public hearing, as reasonable, necessary, or appro- priate for the *enforcement of this title or the regulations or orders thereunder. The Commission shall, by regulation, require each employer, labor organization, and joint labor- management committee subject to this title which controls an apprenticeship or other training program to maintain such records as are reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes of this title, including, but not limited to, a list of applicants who wish to participate in such program, including the chronological order in which applications were received, and to furnish to the Com- mission upon request, a detailed description of the manner in which persons are selected to participate in the apprenticeship or other training program. Any employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor- management committee which believes that the application to it of any regulation or or- der issued under this section would result in undue hardship may apply to the Commis- sion for an exemption from the application of such regulation or order, and, if such ap- plication for an exemption is denied, bring a civil action in the United States district court for the district where such records are kept. If the Commission or the court, as the Case may be, finds that the application of the regulation or order to the employer, employ- ment agency, or labor organization in ques- tion would impose an undue hardship, the Commission or the court, as the case may be, may grant appropriate relief. If any person required to comply with the provisions of this subsection fails or refuses to do so, the United States district court for the district in which such person is found, resides, or transacts business, shall, upon'application of the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency or political subdivision, have juris- diction to issue to such person an order re- quiring him to comply. "(d) In prescribing requirements pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the Com- mission shall consult with other interested State and Federal agencies and shall en- deavor to coordinate its requirements with those adopted by such agencies. The Com- mission shall furnish upon request and with- out cost to any State or local agency charged with the administration of a fair employ- ment practice law information obtained pur- suant to subsection (c) of this section from any onailloyer, employment agency, labor or- ganization, or joint labor-management com- mittee subject to the jurisdiction of such agency. Such information shall be furnished on condition that it not be made public by the recipient agency prior to the institution of a proceeding under State or local law in- volving such information. If this condition Is violated by a recipient agency, the Com- mission may decline to honor subsequent re- quests pursuant to this subsection." SEC. 7. Section 710 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 264; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-9) is amended to read as follows: "INVESTIGATORY POWERS "SEC. 710. For the purpose of all hearings and investigations conducted by the Com- mission or its duly authorized agents or agen- cies, section 11 of the National Labor Rela- tions Act (49 Stat. 455; 29 U.S.C. 161) shall apply." SEC. 8. (a) Section 703(a) (2) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 255; 42 U.S.C. 2000-e-2(a) (2)) Is amended by inserting the words "or applicants for employment" after the words "his employees." (b) Section 708(c)(2) of such Act is amended by inserting the words "or appli- cants for membership" after the word "mem- bership". (el (1) Section 704(a) of such Act is amended by inserting a comma and the fol- lowing: "or joint labor-management com- mittee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs," after "employment agency". (2) Section 704(b) of such Act is amended by (A) striking out "or employment agency" and inserting in lieu thereof "employment agency, or joint labor-management commit- tee controlling apprenticeship or other train- ing or retraining, including on-the-job train- ing programs,", and (B) inserting a comma and the words "or relating to admission to, or employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or other training by such a joint labor-management commit- tee" before the word "indicating". (d) Section 705(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 258; 42 U.S.C. 2000e- 4(a) ) is amended to read as follows: "Sao. 705. (a) There is hereby created a Commission to be known as the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission, which shall be composed of five members, not more than.three of whom shall be members of the same political party. Members of the Com- mission shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate for a term of five years. Any indi- vidual chosen to fill a vacancy shall be ap- pointed only for the unexpired term of the member whom he shall succeed, and all members of the Commission shall continue to serve until their successors are appointed and qualified, except that no such member of the Commission shall continue to serve (1) for more than sixty days when the Con- gress is in session unless a nomination to il such vacancy shall have been submitted to the Senate, or (2) after the adjournment sine die of the session of the Senate in which such nomination was submitted. The Pres- ident shall designate one member to serve as Chairman of the Commission, and one member to serve as Vice Chairman. The Chairman shall be responsible on behalf of the Commission for the administrative op- erations of the Commission, and, except as provided in subsection (b), shall appoint, in accordance with the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, such officers, agents, attorneys, hearing examiners, and employees as he deems necessary to assist it in the performance of its functions and to fix their compensation in accordance with the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates: Provided, That assign- ment, removal, and compensation of hearing examiners shall be in accordance with sec- tions 3105, 3344, 5362, and 7521 of title 5, United States Code." ' (e) (1) Section 705 of such Act is amend- ed by inserting after subsection (a) the fol- lowing new subsection (b) : "(b) (1) There shall be a General Counsel of the Commission appointed by the Presi- dent, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a term of four years. The Gen- eral Counsel shall have responsibility for the conduct of litigation as provided in sections 706 and '707 of this title. The General Coun- sel shall have such other duties as the Com- mission may prescribe or as may be provided by law and shall concur with the Chairman of the Commission on the appointment and supervision of regional attorneys. The Gen- eral Counsel of the Commission on the ef- fective date of this Act shall continue in such position and perform the functio-fis specified in this subsection until a successor is appointed and qualified. "(2) Attorneys appointed under this sec- tion may, at the direction of the Commis- sion, appear for and represent the Commis- sion in any case in court, provided that the Attorney General shall conduct all litigation to which the Commission is a party in the Supreme Court pursuant to this title." (2) Subsections (e) and (h) of such sec- tion 705 are repealed. (3) Subsections (b), (c), (d), (i), and (j) of such section 705, and all references thereto, are redesignated as subsections (c), (d) , (e), (h), and (i), respectively. (f) Section 705(g) (6) of such Act, is amended to read as follows: "(6) to intervene in a civil action brought under section 706 by an aggrieved party against a respondent other than a govern- ment, governmental agency or political sub- division." (g) Section 714 of such Act is amended to read as follows: "FORCIBLY RES/STING THE COMMISSION OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES "SEC. 714. The provisions of sections 111 and 1114, title 18, United States Code, shall apply to officers, agents, and employees of the Commission in the performance of their official duties. Notwithstanding the provi- sions of sections 111 and 1114 of title 18, United States Code, whoever in violation of the provisions of section 1114 of such title kills a person while engaged in or on ac- count of the performance of his official func- tions under this Act shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life." SEC. 9. (a) Section 5314 of title 5 of the United States Code is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: "(58) Chairman, Equal Employment Op- portunity Commission." (b) Clause (72) of section 5315 of such title is amended to read as follows: "(72) Members, Equal Employment Op- portunity Commission (4)." (c) Clause (111) of section 5316 of such title is repealed. (d) Section 5316 of such title is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: "(131) General Counsel of the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission." SEC. 10. Section 715 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended to read as follows: "EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COORDINAT- ING COUNCIL "SEC. 715. There shall be established an Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinat- ing Council (hereinafter referred to in this section as the Council) composed of the Sec- retary of Labor, the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Attorney General, the Chairman of the Unit- ed States Civil Service Commission, and the Chairman of the United States Civil Rights Commission, or their respective delegates. The Council shall have the responsibility for developing and implementing agreements, policies and practices designed to maximize effort, promote efficiency, and eliminate con- flict, competition, duplication and incon- sistency among the operations, functions and jurisdictions of the various departments, agencies and branches of the Federal Gov- ernment responsible for the implementation and enforcement of equal employment op- portunity legislation, orders, and policies. On or before July 1 of each year, the Coun- cil shall transmit to the President and to the Congress a report of its activities, to- gether with such recommendations for leg- islative or administrative changes as it con- cludes are desirable to further promote the purposes of this section." Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Ilfal.ch, 2, 1972 Approved Fo9i4KTAtS?e~1241E?IAPTibl:17K9ASH6R000400100021-4 SEC. 11. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT "SEC. 717. (a) All personnel actions af- fecting employees or applicants for employ- ment (except with regard to aliens employed outside the limits of the United States) in military departments as defined in section 102 of title 5, United States Code, in execu- tive agencies (other than the General Ac- counting Office) as defined in section 105 of title 5, United States Code (including em- ployees and applicants for employment who are paid from nonappropriated funds), in the United States Postal Service and the Postal Rate Commission, in those units of the government of the District .of Colum- bia having positions in the competitive serv- ice, and in those units of the legislative and judicial branches of the. Federal Gov- ernment having positions in the competitive service, and in the Library of Congress shall be made free from any discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. "(b) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Civil Service Commission shall have authority to enforce the provi- sions of subsection (a) through appropriate remedies, including reinstatement or hiring of employees with or without back pay, as will effectuate the policies of this section, and shall issue such rules, regulations, or- ders and instructions as it deems necessary and appropriate to carry out its responsi- bilities under this section. The Civil Service Commission shall? "(1) be responsible for the annual review and approval of a national and regional equal employment opportunity plan which each department and agency and each appropri- ate unit referred to in subsection (a) of this section shall submit in order to maintain an affirmative program of equal employment opportunity for all such employees and ap- plicants for employment; "(2) be responsible for the review and evaluation of the operation of all agency equal employment opportunity programs, periodically obtaining and publishing (on at least a semiannual basis) progress reports from each such department, agency, or unit; and "(3) .consult with and solicit the recom- mendations of interested individuals, groups, and organizations relating to equal employ- ment opportunity. The head of each such department, agency, or unit shall comply with such rules, regu- lations, orders, and instructions which shall include a provision that an employee or ap- plicant for employment shall be notified of any final action taken on any complaint of discrimination filed by him thereunder. The plan submitted by each department, agency, and unit shall include, but not be limited to? "(1) provisions for the establishment of training and education programs designed to provide a maximum opportunity for em- ployees to advance so as to perform at their highest potential; and "(2) a description of the qualifications in - terms of training and experience relating to equal employment opportunity for the prin- cipal and operating officials of each such department, agency, or unit responsible for carrying out the equal employment oppor- tunity program and of the allocation of per- sonnel and resources proposed by such de- partment, agency, or unit to carry out its equal employment opportunity program. With respect to employment In the Library Of Congress, authorities granted in this sub- section to the Civil Service Commission shall be exercised by the Librarian of Congress. "(c) Within thirty days of receipt of no- tice of final action taken by a department, agency, or unit referred to in subsection '717(0, or by the Civil Service Commission upon an appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency, or unit on a com- plaint of discrimffiation based on 'race, color, religion, sex or national origin, brought pur- suant to subsection (a) of this section, Ex- ecutive Order 11478 or any succeeding Exec- utive orders, or after one hundred and eighty days from the filing of the initial charge with the' department, agency, or unit or with - the Civil Service Commission on appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency, or unit until such time as final ac- tion may be taken by a department, agency, or unit, an employee or applicant for em- ployment, if aggrieved by the final disposi- tion of his complaint, or by the failure to take final action on his complaint, may file a civil action as provided in section 706, in which civil action the head of the depart- ment, agency, or unit, as appropriate, shall be the defendant. "(d) The provisions of section 706 (f) through (k), as applicable, shall govern civil actions brought hereunder. "(e) Nothing contained in this Act shall relieve any Government agency or official of its or his primary responsibility to assure nondiscrimination in employment as re- quired by the Constitution and statutes or of its or his responsibilities under Executive Order 11478 relating to equal employment opportunity in the Federal Government." SEC. 12. Section 5108(c) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by? (1) striking out the word "and" at the end of paragraph (9); (2) striking out the period at the end of paragraph (10) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and the word "and"; and (3) by adding immediately after para- graph (10) the last time it appears therein in the following new paragraph: "(11) the Chairman of the Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission, subject to the standards and procedures prescribed by this chapter, may place an additional ten positions in the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission in GS-16, GS-17, and GS-18 for the purposes of carrying out title VII of the Civil Rights At of 1964." SEC. 13. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1961 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) is further amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "SPECIAL PROVISION WITH RESPECT TO DENIAL, TERMINATION, AND SUSPENSION OF GOVERN- MENT CONTRACTS "SEC. 718. No Government contract, or por- tion thereof, with any employer, shall be denied, withheld, terminated, or suspended, by any agency or officer of the United States under any equal employment opportunity law or order, where such employer has an affirmative action plan which has previously been accepted by the Government for the same facility within the past twelve months without first according such employer full hearing and adjudication ..iander the provi- sions of title 5, United States Code, section 551, and the following pertinent sections: Provided, That if such employer has deviated substantially from such previously agreed to affirmative action plan, this section shall not apply; Provided further, That for the pur- poses of this section an affirmative action plan shall be deemed to have been accepted by the Government at the time the appro- priate compliance agency has accepted such plan unless within forty-five days thereafter the Office of Federal Contract Compliance has disapproved such plan." Sm. 14. The amendments made by this Act to section '706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 shall be applicable with respect to charges pending with the Commission on 11 1697 the date of enactment of this Act and all charges filed thereafter. And the Senate agree to the same. CARL D. PERKINS, JOHN H. DENT, . AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, PATSY T. MINK, PHILLIP BURTON, WM. L. (BILL) CLAY, JOSEPH M. GAYDOS, WILLIAM D. FORD, MARIO BIAGGI, ROMANO L. MAZZOLI, ROMAN C. PUCINSKI, JOHN BRADEMAS, ALBERT H. QUIE, JOHN N. ERLENBORN, ALPHONZO BELL, MARVIN L. ESCH, EARL F. LA NDGREBE, ORVAL HANSEN, WILLIAM A. STEIGER, JACK KEMP, Managers on the Part of the House. HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JENNINGS RAND OLPH, CLAIBORNE FELL, GAYLORD NELSON, THOMAS F. EAGLETON, ADLAI E. STEVENSON, HAROLD E. HUGHES, JACOB K. JAVrTS, RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, BOB PACKWOOD, ROBERT TAFT, Jr., ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Managers on the Part of the Senate. JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF MANAGES AT THE CONFERENCE ON H.R. 1746 To FUR- THER PROMOTE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPOR- TUNITIES FOR AMERICAN WORKERS The managers on the part of the House and Senate at the conference on the dis- agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 1746) an Act to further promote equal em- ployment opportunities for American work- ers, submit the following joint statement to the House and Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the managers and recommended in the accom- panying conference report. The points in disagreement and the con- ference resolution of them are as follows: The House bill provided the short title "Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1971". The Senate amendment provided the short title "Equal Employment Opportuni- ties Enforcement Act of 1972". The Senate receded with an amendment changing the date in the House provision to 1972. Under the House bill, there was no pro- vision for an expansion of coverage of Title VII, The Senate amendment expanded cover- age to include: (1) State and local governments, govern- mental agencies, political subdivisions (ex- cept for elected officials, their personal as- sistants and immediate advisors) and the District of Columbia departments and agen- cies (except where such are subject by law to the Federal competitive service). State agencies previously covered by reference to the United States Employment Service con- tinue to be covered; and (2) employers who employ 15 or more full-time employees and labor organizations with 15 or more members beginning one year after enactment. In addition, the Senate amendment in- cluded a new definition of "religion" to in- clude all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an em- ployer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious observ- ance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1698 Approved For Rcemwdz The House receded with an amendment exempting, in addition to State and local government elected officials, persons chosen by such officials to be on their personal staffs, appointees of such officials on a pol.. icymaking level or immediate advisors of such elected officials. The exemption doer, not include civil service employees. It is the intention of the conferees to ex- empt elected officials and members of their personal staffs, and persons appointed by such elected officials as advisors or to policy- making positions at the highest levels of the departments or agencies of State or local governments, such as cabinet officers, and persons with comparable responsibilities at the local level. It is the conferees intent that this exemption shall be construed narrowly. Also, all employees subject to State or local civil service laws are not exempted. The Senate amendment eliminated the present exemption from Title VII for edu- cational institutions. Also, the Senate pro- vision expanded the exemption for religious organizations from coverage under this title with respect to the employment of individu- als of a particular religion in all their ac- tivities instead of the present limitation to religious activities. The House bill did not change the existing exemptions. The House receded. Both the House bill and Senate amend- ment ? contained procedures for filing of charges. The Senate amendment provided for charges to be filed by or on behalf of a person claiming to be aggrieved, or by 1111 officer or employee of the Commission upon request of any person claiming to be ag- grieved. Charges were to be in writing under oath or affirmation and in the specific form required by the Commission. The Senate amendment further provided that the Com- mission serve a notice of the charge includ- ing the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment practice on the respondent within 10 days. Under the Senate amendment, the Commission would dismiss the charge if it determined after investigation that there was not reasonable cause to believe the charge was true and would be required to accord substantial weight to the decision of state and local authorities under state and local equal em- ployment opportunity laws in making such reasonable cause determination. The Senate amendment also required the Commission to make its determination so far as prac. ticable not later than 120 days from the date the Commission was authorized to act on the charge. The House bill provided for charges to be filed by the person claiming to be aggrieved or by a member of the Commission if he had reasonable cause to believe a violation oc- curred. The Commissioner's charge had to set forth the facts upon which it was based and the person or persons aggrieved. The House bill also provided that the Commis- sion furnish the respondent with a copy of the charge within five days. Both the House bill and the Senate amendment prohibited disclosure of anything said or done during informal conciliation efforts without the consent of the parties. The Senate receded with an amendment providing that charges be filed by or on be- half of the person claiming to be aggrieved or by a member of the Commission, alleging that an unlawful employment practice oc- curred. Charges are to be in writing under oath for affirmation and in such form as the Commission requires. A notice of a charge including the date, place and circum- stances of the alleged unlawful employment practice is to be served on the respondent within 10 days. If the Commission determines after investigation that there is not reason- able cause to believe the charge is true, it shall dismiss the charge and notify the par- ties. The Commission is required to accord substantial weight to the decision of the state MORAL QtAffaegaBOAXAM)00400100021 -44-arch2. ii2 appointment of a three judge district court in cases certified to be of general public fin- portance, provided for the immediate desig- nation of a single judge if no three judge court was requested, and required cases to be assigned for hearing at the earliest prac- ticable date and to be expedited in every way. The House bill contained no such provision. The Senate receded with an amendment which provides that the chief judge of the district in which a ease is filed designate the judge to hear the case which is to be assigned for hearing at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way. The amendment deleted the provision for the three judge dis- trict court. Such a court is now provided for in "pattern or practice" cases. The Senate amendment authorized the Commission or the Attorney General to seek preliminary injunctive relief. The House bill authorized the Commission to seek prelim- inary relief and required a showing that sub- stantial and irreparable injury to the ag- grieved party would be unavoidable. The Senate receded with an amendment that au- thorizes the Commission or the Attorney Gen- eral to seek preliminary injunctive relief and a provision that Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should govern all actions brought under this subsection. The Senate amendment restated existing law as to venue for civil actions except that the term "aggrieved person" was substituted for the word "plaintiff." The House bill left existing law intact. The House receded. The House bill and the Senate amendment provided for the scope of relief that could be granted by the district courts. The dif- ferences were as follows: 1. The Senate amendment required a find- ing that the respondent engaged in an un- lawful employment practice and the House bill required a finding that respondent "in- tentionally" engaged in such unlawful em- ployment practice. 2. The Senate amendment added the phrase "or any other equitable relief that the court deems appropriate" to the description of the relief available from the court. 3. The Senate amendment limited back pay liability to that which accrues from a date not more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission; the House bill limited back pay liability to that which accrues not more than two years before the filing of a complaint with the court. Both the House bill and the Senate amendment provided that interim earnings shall operate to reduce the back pay other- wise allowable. 4. The House bill restated the provisions of existing law prohibiting court-ordered remedies based on any adverse action except unlawful employment practices prohibited under Title VII. 5. The House bill prohibited class action lawsuits. The Senate receded with an amendment that provides the following: 1. A finding that the respondent has in- tionally engaged or is intentionally engag- ing in an unlawful employment practice, as the language of the current law reads. 2. Authority for the court to enjoin the respondent from such practices, order such affirmative action as may be appropriate and any other equitable relief that the court deems appropriate. 3. The court is authorized to award back pay except that such back pay liability is limited to that which accrues from the date not more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission. Interim earnings shall operate to reduce the back pay otherwise allowable. 4. The provisions of existing law prohibit- ing court ordered remedies based on any adverse action except unlawful employment practices under Title VII are retained. The Senate amendment permitted pay- ment of costs and counsel fees to small cm- or local authorities under state or local equal employment opportunity laws and to make the determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and so far as practicable not later than 120 days from the date the Commission was author- ized to act on the charge. If the Commission determines that there is reasonable cause to believe the charge is true, it shall attempt conciliation in conformity with the require- ments of existing law. Nothing said or done during conciliation may be disclosed without the consent of the parties. The Senate amendment contained two provisions allowing the Commission to defer to state and local equal employment oppor- tunity agencies. It deleted the language of existing law providing that no charge may be filed during the 60-day period allowed for the deferral and substituted a provision pro- hibiting the Commission from acting on such a charge until the expiration of the 60-clay period .The House bill made no change in existing law. The Senate receded with an amendment that would re-state the exist- ing law on the deferral of charges to state agencies. The conferees left existing law in- tact with the understanding that the de- cision in Love's v. Pullman,?U.S.?(Febru- ary 17, 1972) interpreting the existing law to allow the Commission to receive a charge (but not act on it) during such deferral period is controlling. Both the House bill and the Senate amend- ment provided that charges be filed within 180 days. The Senate allowed an additional 120 days if a charge is deferred to a state agency and the House allowed only 30 addi- tional days. The Senate amendment required that notice of the charge be served in 10 days. The House bill provided that charges under Title VII are the exclusive remedy for unlawful employment practices. The House receded. Both the House bill and the Senate amend- ment authorized the bringing of civil actions in Federal district courts in cases involving unlawful employment practices. The Senate amendment provided that the Attorney General bring actions against state and local governments. As to other respond- ents, suits were to be brought by the Com- mission. The Senate amendment permitted suits by the Commission or the Attorney General if the Commission was unable to secure from the respondent "a conciliation agreement acceptable to the Commission" while the House bill permitted the Commis- sion to sue if it is unable to obtain "volun- tary compliance." The Senate amendment permitted aggrieved persons to intervene in suits and allowed a private action if no case is brought by the Commission or Attorney General within 150 days. The House bill per- mitted a private action after 180 days. The Senate amendment allowed the General Counsel or Attorney General to intervene in private actions; the House bill permitted only the Attorney General to intervene. The Senate amendment permitted a private ac- tion in a case where the Commission entered Into a conciliation agreement to which the aggrieved person was .not a party (i.e. a signatory). The conferees adopted a provision allow- ing the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case against a state or local government agency, to bring an action in Federal district courts if the Commission is unable to secure from the respondent "a conciliation agree- ment aceptable to the Commission." Ag- grieved parties are permitted to intervene. They may bring a private action if the Com- mission or Attorney General has not brought suit within 180 days or the Commission has entered into a conciliation agreement to which such aggrieved party is not a signatory. The Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving state and local govern- ments, may intervene in such private action. The Senate amendment provided for the Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 a P. IliarcA2, 19 72 Approved FccaftwsgmickegitEggRoaawegp6R000400100021-4 H 1699 ployers or labor organizations if they pre- vailed in actions brought against them by the Commission or the United States. An employer or union with 25 or fewer em- ployees or members would have been en- titled to up to$5000, and an employer or labor organization with from 25 to 100 em- ployees or jnenabers Whose average income from such employment was less than $7500, would have been entitled to one-half the cost of its defense up to$2500. The House bill had no comparable provisions. The Sen- ate receded. The Senate amendment authorized the courts to appoint a special master if the district court had not assigned a case for trial within 120 days after issue had been joined. There was no comparable House pro- vision. The House receded. *The Senate amendment provided for a transfer of the Attorney General's "pattern or practice" jurisdiction to the Commission two years after enactment. In the interim period there would be concurrent jurisdic- tion. Tin. transfer would be subject to change in accordance with a presidential reorgani- zation plan if not vetoed by Congress. The House bill left pattern or practice jurisdic- tion with the Attorney General. The House receded. The Senate amendment revised the Com- mission's procedures for cooperating with State and local agencies and in its record keeping requirements and provided pro- cedures for compelling compliance with such requirements. The House bill did not amend the provisions of the current law. The House receded. The Senate amendment simplified pro- cedures for subpoenaing witnesses or rec- ords by providing the same investigative au- thority as is contained in the National Labor Relations Act. The House bill made no changes in existing authority. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided for the appointment, with the advice and consent of the Senate, of up to four new commission members at any time after one year from the effective date of the act. The proportion of commissioners of one political party to an- other would remain the same. Regional Di- rectors were to be appointed by the Chair- man of the Commission with the concurrence of the General Counsel. The Senate amend- ment also placed a limit on the time that a Commissioner may serve after the appoint- ment expires and the Senate has not acted. The House bill contained no such provisions. The Senate receded with an amendment limiting the time that a Commissioner may serve after the appointment expires and the Senate has not acted. The Senate amendment established the office of General Counsel to be appointed by the President for a term of four years with the advice and consent of the Senate. The General Counsel was given the responsibil- ity for filing complaints and the conduct of all litigation for the Commission. Also the General Counsel was given authority to ap- point regional attorneys, with the concur- rence of the Chairman, and other necessary employees. The House bill did not establish a General Counsel, and required that the Attorney General conduct all litigation to which the Commission is a party in the Su- preme Court or in the United States Court of Appeals. All other litigation in which the Commission was a party was to be conducted by the Commission. The Senate receded with an amendment establishing the Office of General Counsel to be appointed by the President for a term of four years with the advice and consent of the Senate giving the General Counsel responsibility for litigation and concurrence with the Chairman in the appointment and supervision of regional at- torneys but reserving to the Attorney Gen- eral the conduct of all litigation to which the Commission is a party in the Supreme Court. The Senate amendment permitted the Commission to accept uncompensated serv- ices for the limited purpose of publicizing in the media the Commission and its activ- ities. The House bill did not provide such authority. The Senate receded. The Senate amendment permitted the Commission to delegate certain functions, ex- cept for rulemaking and the power to make agreements with States. The House bill did not contain such a provision. The Senate receded. The Senate amendment afforded additional protection to officers and employees of the Commission in the performance of their official duties by including them within sec- tion 1114 of Title 18, U.S.C. The House bill corgained no such provision. The Senate re- ceded with an amendment affording this new protection but excluding capital punishment for offenders. The Senate amendment raised the level of the position of the Chairman and members of the Commission and established the posi- tion of General Counsel in the executive pay scale. The House bill made no provision for such change. The House receded. The Senate amendment established an Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinat- ing Council. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. The Committee of Conference believes that there are instances in which more than one agency may have legitimate interests in the employment standards applicable to a num- ber of employees. So for example, the merit system standards of the Civil Service Com- mission should be considered by the Co- ordinating Council in relation to their effect on the conciliation and enforcement efforts of the Equal Employment Opportunity Com- mission and the Attorney General with re- spect to employees of governments, govern- mental agencies or political subdivisions. The Senate amendment provided that all personnel actions involving Federal employees be free from discrimination. This policy was to be enforced by the United States Civil Service Commission. Each agency of the Fed- eral Government would be responsible for establishing an internal grievance procedure and programs to train personnel so as to enable them to advance under the supervi- sion of the Civil Service Commission. If final action had been taken by an agency or the Civil Service Commission, an aggrieved party could bring a civil action under the provisions of section 706. The House bill did not cover Federal employees. The House receded. In providing the statutory basis for such appeal or court access, it Is not the intent of the iainmittee to subordinate any discretionary authority or final lutiament now reposed in agency heads by, or under, statute for na- United StateA The Senate amendment required consulta- tion among the Executive branch agencies on Equal Employment matters. The House bill had no similar provision. The Senate receded in light of the action of the Conferees in establishing the Equal Employment Opportu- nity Coordinating Council. The Senate amendment provided the Com- mission with authorization for an additional 10 positions at GS-16, GS-17, and 05-18 level. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided that the new enforcement provisions of section 706 apply to charges pending before the Commis- sion on enactment. The House bill was silent. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided that no Government contraet, whether subject to Ex- ecutive Order 11246 or any other equal em- ployment opportunity law such as section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, could be terminated, denied, or withheld without a full hearing, where the employer had an affirmative action plan previously accepted within the past twelve months. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. CARL D. PERKINS, JOHN H. DENT, AUGUSTUS F. HAWK/NS, PATSY T. MINK, PHILLIP BURTON, ? Wm. L. (BILL) CLAY, JOSEPH M. GAYDOS, WILLIAM D. FORD, MARIO BIAGGI, ROMANO L. MAZZOLL ROMAN C. PUCINSKI, JOHN BRADEMAS, ALBERT H. QUIZ, JOHN N. ERLENBORN, ALPHONZO BELL, MARVIN L. ESCH, EARL F. LANDGREBE, ORVAL HANSEN, WILLIAM A. STEIGER, JACK KEMP, Managers on the Part of the House. HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JENNINGS RANDOLPH, CLAIBORNE PELL, GAYLORD NELSON, THOMAS F. EAGLETON, ADLAI E. STEVENSON, HAROLD E. HUGHES, JACOB K. JAVITS, RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, BOB PACKWOOD, ROBERT TFT, Jr., ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Managers on the Part of the Senate. NSUMERS NEED PROTECTION OM DIRTY MEAT?NOT MORE IT perm minut and in Mr. househo any me domestic as cuts, be sumed. My wife d MELCHER asked and was given sion to address the House for 1 , to revise and extend his remarks ude extraneous matter.) HER. Mr. Dpeaker, in my we have stopped the use of except American-produced eat which we can examine, re they are cooked and con- es not put or. our break- fast, dinner, r supper tables any pre- pared meats, h mburger, meat soups, or other products hich may contain im- ported meat. As a veterinaria , I have no confidence that many kinds imported meat can be trusted to be holesome, healthful and fit for human c sumption. I know that in 19'O we admitted 11 million pounds of me t into the United States from just seven ustralian plants which were found unfi to ship to the United States after th determination of unfitness had been ade. I know there were hundreds more oreign plants found to be dirty and not t to export to us but that many times t 11 million pounds were admitted from such sub- standard plants abroad befor they were delisted, or cleaned up, beca our re- view officers inspect only abou once a year. Our review staff is blade., ate to get around more often than that. The practice in my home of using American meat only is going to con 'nue until this country cleans up impo ted meats by establishing an imported m-at Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1700 a MIN Approved For RelemaggifflAflititi:81/B3_0_006N0400100021-4 March'2, 1172 inspection system which provides con- sumer protection instead of a sort of diplomatic immunity from strictly en- forced U.S. inspection requirements. That inspection is going to have to in- clude testing for chemical residues which might be injurious to health. Our State Department is shielding the exporting countries from a requirement to set standards equal to ours concerning the use of pesticides and other chemicals that are hazards to human health. The House Agriculture Committee knuckled under to overwhelming admin- istration pressure from State and Agri- culture Departments to delete from a bill equal standards for domestic and foreign food producers in the use of chemicals which leave residues injurious to the health of consumers. The miniscule res- idue sampling we do on foreign meat im- ports shows alarming increase of chlo- rinated hydrocarbon residues such as DDT and benzene hexachloride which are banned in this country for us on live- stock. It is quite shocking to me, Mr. Speak- er, that this country is considering in- creasing meat import allowances to roll back th price of our domestic product, instead of talking with exporting coun- tries about the cleanliness and healthful- ness of what we are already getting. The Comptroller General of the United States has recently supplied this Con- gress with a report on inspection of foreign packing plants and meat im- ports?both fresh, chilled, cooked, and canned?that should eause Members to demand suspension of all imports until their wholesomeness and healthfulness can be guaranteed, and we can be as- sured every pound of it was produced in plants that meet American inspection standards under the eyes of reliable in- spectors, and not a corps of people over- awed by diplomatic niceties. The report to me is like a rerun of a bad dream be- cause I cited to the House early in 1970 the glaring shortcomings of inspection of foreign meats. Let me call the House's attention to the sort of thing that is going on in the meatpacking plants that ship to the United States, and what our inspectors, who visit those plants about once a year, and doing about it, as reported by the General Accounting Office. The GAO sent investigators along with our foreign review officers on visits to 80 plants in four countries that export to the United States. In Australia, the source of 505 million pounds of imported beef and veal and 25 million pounds of mutton in 1971, they visited 35 plants-10 of them or nearly 30 percent so bad that they had to be de- listed and denied the right to ship to the United States, but the meat they had already shipped us was not inter- cepted. Until the delisting was officially cleared in Washington and transmitted to the foreign government some 6 weeks later the plants continued to unload their unfit meat on us. One other plant was found not in compliance with our U.S. sanitation and health require- ments, but not so bad that it was de- listed. You can judge what the condi- tions must have been in the "delisted" plants by the description of the one al- lowed to continue in operation. The GAO tells us: The (U.S.) Consumer and Marketing Serv- ice foreign programs officer reported that the (Australian) inspectors at this plant? Did not require that grossly contaminated carcasses be trimmed before going to the coolers or boning rooms. Did not require that carcasses be dressed in a sanitary manner. In performing examinations on beef heads, passed heads even though there were big balls of ingesta in the mouths. Failed to detect a diseased head which should have been condemned and should have served as the basis for a more com- plete inspection of the carcass. When., the foreign programs officer pointed out the con- dition to the Australian inspection officials, the carcass was inspected further and the carcass and parts were condemned. The foreign programs officer reported also that the preoperative sanitation inspection of the plant showed that almost all equip- ment looked at was dirty and that the filth on some equipment was obviously of many days duration. He stated that the Australian inspector inspected some of the same equip- ment but took no action to have the equip- ment cleaned before operations started. The foreign programs officer reported further that he found slaughtering operations in process about 1 hour after the preoperative inspec- tion, that he rechecked some of the equip- ment and found it to be still dirty and that the Australian inspector permitted the slaughtering operations to continue. Despite the above-cited deficiencies, and the fact that no action was taken at the time of the review, C&MS gave Australian Inspection officials the option of correcting the deficiencies or delisting the plants. C&MS officials told us they did not require the plant to be delisted because the deficien- cies pertained mainly to improper inspection by Australian inspectors and could be read- ily corrected. A C&MS foreign programs officer's review of the plant about 21/2 months later, in July, 1970, showed that deficiencies still existed. The plant was delisted at that time, and as of November, 1972 it had not been recerti- fied for exporting to the United States. Un- til it was delisted, the plant remained eligible to export meat products to the United States even though It was not in compliance with U.S. requirements. C&MS records relating to plants in Aus- tralia showed that C&MS had not always re- quired inspection officials to correct promptly certain deficiencies in the Australian inspec- tion system or in approved plants. This episode, which means that Amer- ican consumers ate dirty and possibly un- healthy meat from a dirty packing plant in Australia for months after our people knew about it, in addition to 10 plants they did not know about for months prior to inspection, Is only one of scores of known and unknown cases of this kind, and it is only one of a series of instances of official negligence, resulting in dirty and unwholesome meat reaching our con- sumers, which reach right here into this House of Representatives. This House of Representatives has had the laxity of meat inspection called to its attention in the past. I have a bill be- fore it, passed once by the Senate, to re- quire piece-by-piece inspection of meat after it reaches our shores, but it has not been passed, although the evidence piles up that the meat products we are getting from abroad include up to 30 percent from plants which do not meet our in- spection standards. If the filth and carelessness in the Australian plant, which was not delisted, was mainly the result of lax inspection, why did not our inspectors crack down on the Australian inspection system, which our law says must be equivalent to ours? Why was no action taken against the Australian inspector who allowed the practices described? Why did we not notify the Australian Government to get its inspection in compliance with our re- quirement at once? And when the Congress of the United States knows that this sort of lax inspec- tion of foreign plants is going on, why do we not crack down on the whole busi- ness and take the steps necessary to stop it? We can get out and pass the bill within days to require piece by piece ex- amination of imported meat after it reaches the United States. The Depart- ment of Agriculture has opposed it, both at Senate hearings, and at House hear- ings. The Senate proceeded to pass the bill, nonetheless. The House did not act on it, and it died. Some of my colleagues felt that the introduction of the bill, the hearings and the attention given the subject then would cause necessary reform exporting; that action which might offend the gov- ernments of the countries exporting dirty meat was unnecessary, and it might cause retaliation against U.S. products. As one industry apologist put it: "Yes, we have to eat their dirty meat so they will eat our dirty stuff." In order to frighten me, he mentioned rat droppings in wheat. In other words, our consumers must eat filthy products so that handlers, processors, and exploiters both here or abroad would not be required to live up to strict standards. If the United States is allowing prod- ucts to be exported from our shores that are dirty, or substandard, we should stop it immediately. And if the standards we have set to reassure our consumers that the food products they are buying and eating are clean, wholesome, and healthful are be- ing ignored abroad, we should crack down without fear, favor, or any further tolerance of officials who seem to think that a little ingesta, a little manure, a few cysts and lesions, a quantity of dirt .and trash, and some blood clots, hair, and bones ought to be tolerated, and that JOHN MELCHER and Senator ABE RIBI- CORR who has repeatedly protested in the Senate ought to keep their mouths shut. Much of this traffic in dirty foreign meat is frozen boneless beef which many consumer groups believe to be sold here at greatly reduced prices to cut the aver- age housewife's grocery bill. Not so. The Provisioner's February 10, 1972, quota- tion for American produced and graded boneless beef was 69% cents as compared to imported bull meat at 66 cents a pound and imported cow meat at 631/2 cents a pound, none of which is graded and less than 1 percent of which is actually U.S. inspected. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 arch 8, 1972 STATINTL 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE H 1861 CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1746, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPOR- TUNITY ACT OF 1972 Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Sbeaker, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 1746) to further promote equal employ- ment opportunities for American work- ers, arid ask unanimous consent that the statement of the managers be read in lieu of the report. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ken- tucky? There was no objection. The Clerk read the statement. (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of March 2, 1972.) Mr. PERKINS (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the statement of the managers be dispensed with. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ken- lucky? There was no objection. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I need not tell the Mem- bers of this body of the importance of the conference report on H.R. 1746, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. This measure was debated vigor- ously and at substantial length in both Houses of the Congress. Each body of the Congress expressed a preference for judicial enforcement as an alternative to administrative "cease and desist authority" as a means of en- forcing title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The conferees, therefore, did not have to deal with that issue which had so di- vided Members of both Houses. The conference itself was not lengthy, In part because the differences were not great. Each difference was carefully con- sidered, however. The conference report which I present to the House today is one of which we can all be proud. In evidence of that be- lief I would point to the fact that all the conferees signed their names to the con- ference report. Among the conferees there were some very deeply felt differences. The resolu- tion of those differences, however, as so often happens, has produced a legisla- tive product which is substantially bet- ter than either of the bills which the conferees considered. The conference resulted in legislation that will provide fair and effective en- forcement of the equal employment pro- visions of the Civil Rights Act. The con- ference report provides a mechanism and a procedure that will,,I am certain, prove to be both fair and effective, one which will protect the rights of both the em- ployer and employees. The conferees spent considerable time dealing with the detailed provisions cov- ering the procedure for filing and proc- essing charges of discrimination brought by individuals who feel they have been unfairly treated because of their race or their sex. An effort was made to insure a speedy and an equitable resolution of such charges which is in the interest of both the employee and the respondent employer or labor union. The conferees contemplate that the Commission will continue to make every effort to conciliate as is required by exist- ing law. Only if conciliation proves to be impossible do we expect the Commission to bring action in Federal district court to seek enforcement. There will be some expansion of cover- age of title VII. Beginning 1 year after enactment all employers employing 15 or more full-time employees and all labor organizations with 15 or more members will be covered. The present law calls for coverage of employers and labor unions of 25 or more employees or members. Coverage has been expanded also to Include the employees of State and local governments, governmental agencies, po- litical subdivisions of States and the Dis- trict of Columbia departments and agen- cies. In expanding coverage to State and local government employees the confer- ence exempted elected officials and per- sons chosen by such officials to work on their personal staffs, as well as ap- pointees to policymaking positions at the highest level of the department or agency of the State or local government. It was our intention to exclude cabinet members of Governors and persons with compar- able responsibility at the local level. Where a State or local government agency is involved, and conciliation has proven impossible, it is the Attorney General rather than the Commission Who is authorized to bring action in the case. Another provision which I am sure may be of interest to the House is the transfer of the Attorney General's "pat- tern or practice" jurisdiction which is transferred to the Commission 2 years after the enactment of this law. During the interim period there will be concur- rent jurisdiction. This transfer will be subject to change, however, in accord- ance with any Presidential reorganiza- tion plan that would contemplate a dif- ferent result if that reorganization plan Is not vetoed by the Congress under the usual procedure. I will not go on at great length dis- cussing the final resolution of the many matters of procedure which are spelled out in the conference report. The provi- sions of the conference report are, how- ever, dealt with in more detail in a sec- tion-by-section analysis which I include in the RECORD following my remarks. I do, however, urge all my colleagues to support the conference report. The section-by-section analysis follows: SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS or HR. 1746, THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1972 This analysis explains the major provisions of H.R. 1746, the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972. as agreed to by the Con- ference Committee pf the House and Senate on February 29, 1972. The explanation re- flects the enforcement provisions of Title VII, as amended by the procedural and jurisdic- tional provisions of H.R. 1746, recommended by the Conference Committee. In any area where the new law dpes not address itself, or in any areas where a specific- contrary intention is not indicated, it was assumed that the present case law as de- veloped by the courts would continue to govegn the applicability and construction of Title VII. SECTION 2 This section amends certain definitions contained in section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 701(a)?This subsection defines "person" as used in Title VII. Under the pro- visions of H.R. 1746, the term is now ex- panded to include State and local govern- ments, governmental agencies, and political subdivisions. Section 701(b)?This subsection defines the term "employer" as used in Title VII. This subsection would now include, within the meaning of the term "employer," all State and local governments, governmental agencies, and political subdivisions, and the District of Columbia departments or agen- cies (except those subject by statute to the procedures of the Federal competitive service . as defined in 5 U.S.C. ? 2102, who along with all other Federal employees? would now be covered by section 717 of the Act.) This subsection would extend coverage of the term "employer," one year after enact- ment, to those employers with 15 or more employees. The present-standard for deter- mining the number of mployees of an em- ployer, i.e., "employees for each working day In each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year," pres- ently applicable to all employers of 25 or more employees would apply to the expanded coverage of employers of 15 or more em- ployees. Segtion 701(c)?This subsection eliminates the present language that provides a par- tial exemption for agencies of the United States, States or the political subdivisions of States from the definition of "employment agency" to reflect the provisions of section 701(a) and (b) above. States agencies, pre- viously covered by reference to the United States Employment Service, continue to be covered as employment agencies under this section. Section 701(e)?This subsection is revised to include labor organizations with 15 or more members within the coverage of Title VII, one year atfer enactment. Section 701(f)?This subsection is in- tended to exclude from the definition of "Em- ployee" as used in Title VII those persons elected to public office in any State or politi- cal subdivision. The exemption extends to persons chosen by such officials to be on their personal staffs, appointees of such officials to be on their personal staff, appointees of such officials on the highest policymaking levels such as cabinet members or other im- mediate advisors of such elected officials with respect to the exercise of the Constitutional or legal powers of the office held by such elected. officer. The exemption does not in- clude civil service employees. This exemp- tion is inteded to be construed very narrowly and is in no way intended to establish an overall narrowing of the expanded cover- age of State and local governmental em- ployees as set forth in section 701(a) and (b) above. Section 701(1)?This subsection, which is new, defines "religion" to include all aspects of religious observance, practice and belief, so as to require employers to make reason- able accommodations for employees whose "religion" may include observances, prac- tices and beliefs such as sabbath observance, which differ from the employer's or poten- tial employer's requirements regarding stand- ards, schedules, or other business-related employment conditions. Failure to make such accommodation would be unlawful unless an employer can demonstrate that he cannot reasonably ac- commodate such beliefs, practices, or observ- ances without undue hardship on the con- duct of his business. The purpose of this subsection is to pro- vide the statutory basis for EEOC to formu- . Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1862 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE March 8, 1972 late guidelines on discrimination because of religion such as those challenged in Dewey v. Reynolds Metals Company, 429 F2d 325 (6th Cir. 1970). Affirmed by an equally divided court, 402 U.S. 689 (1971). SECTION 3 This section emends the exemptions al- lowed in section 702 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 702?This section is amended to eliminate the exemption for employees of educational institutions. Under the provi- sions of this section, all private and public educational institutions would be covered under the provisions of Title VII. The special provision relating to religious educational institutions in Section 703(e) (2) is not dis- turbed. The limited exemption from coverage in this section for religious corporations, as- sociations, educational institutions or soci- eties has been broadened to allow such en- thee to employ Individuals of a particular religion in all their activities Instead of the present limitation to religious activities. Such organizations remain subject to the provisions of Title VII with regard to race, color, sex or national origin. SECTION 4 This section establishes the enforcement powers and functions of the EEOC and the Attorney General to aid in the prevention of unlawful employment practices proscribed by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. H.R. 1746 retains the general scheme of the present law which enables the EEOC to process a charge of employment discrimi- nation through the investigation and con- ciliation stages. In addition, H.R. 1746 now authorizes the EEOC, in cases where the re- spondent is not a government, governmental agency of political subdivision to file a civil action against the respondent in an appro- priate Federal District Court, if it has been unable to eliminate an alleged unlawful em- ployment practice by informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion. The Attorney General is authorized to file civil actions against respondents that are govern- ments, governmental agenices or political subdivisions if the EEOC is unable to achieve a successful conciliation. Accordingly, section 4 of HR. 1746, amends section 706(a) through (g) of the present act to accomplish the stated national pur- poses of achieving equal employment op- portunity as follows: Section 706 (a)?This subsection empowers the Commission to prevent persons from en- gaging in unlawful employment practices under sections 703 and 704 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The unlawful employment practices encompassed by sec- tions 703 and 704, which were enumerated in 1964 in the original Act, and as defined and expanded by the courts remain in effect. Section 706(b)?This subsection sets out the procedures to be followed when a charge of an unlawful employment practice is filed with the Commission. Under present law, a charge may be filed by a person aggrieved under oath or by a member of the Commission. As amended, this subsection now also permits a charge to he 51-)d by or on behalf of a person aggrieved or by a member of the Commission. Among other things, this provision would enable aggrieved persons to have charges processed under circumstances where they are un- willing to come forward publicly for fear of economic or physical reprisals. Charges (whether by or on behalf of an aggrieved person or a member of the Com- mission) must be in writing and under oath or affirmation and in such form as the Com- mission requires. The Commission Is to serve a notice of the charge on the respondent within ten days It is not intended, however, that failure to give notice of the charge to the respondent within ten days would prejudice the rights of the aggrieved party. The Commission would be expected to Investigate the charge as quickly as possible and to make its de- termination on whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true. If It finds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, it shall dismiss the charge and notify the complain- ant and the respondent of its decision. If the Commission finds reasonable cause, it will attempt to conciliate the case. Noth- ing said or done during the Commission's informal endeavors may be made public or used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding without the written consent of the parties covered. The Commission would be required to make its determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, "so far as prac- ticable," within 120 days from the filing of the charge or from the date upon which the Commission is authorized to act on the charge under section 706(c) or (d). The Commission, where appropriate, would be required in making its determination of rea- sonable cause to accord substantial weight to final findings and orders made by State or local authorities under State and local laws. This subsection and section 9(a)-(d) of the bill clarifies existing law to carry out the intent of the present statute to provide full coverage for joint labor-management committees controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on- the-job training programs as reflected in Rios v. Enterprise Assn., Steamlitters Local No. 638, 326 F. Supp. 193 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). Sections 706(c) and (d)?These subsec- tions, dealing with deferral to appropriate State and local equal employment oppor- tunity agencies, are identical to sections 706 (b) and (c) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. No change in these provisions was deemed necessary in view of the recent Supreme Court decision of Love v. Pullman Co., U.S. , 92 S. Ct. 616 (1972) which ap- proved the present EEOC deferral procedures as fully in compliance with the intent of the Act. That case held that the EEOC may receive and defer a charge to a State agency on behalf of a complainant and begin to process the charge in the EEOC upon lapse of the 60-day deferral period, even though the language provides that no charge can be filed under section 706(a) by the person aggrieved before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced un- der the State or local law. Similarly, the re- cent circuit court decision In Vigil v. AT&T, ----F. 2d , 4 FEP cases 345 (10th Cir. 1972), which provided that in order to pro- tect the aggrieved person's right to file with the EEOC within the time periods specified In section 706(c) -and (d), a charge filed with a State or local agency may also be filed with the EEOC during the 60-day deferral period, is within the intent of this Act. Section 706(e)?This subsection sets forth the time limitations for filing charges with the Commission. Under the present law, charges must be filed within 90 days after an alleged unlaw- ful employment practice has occurred. In cases where the Commission defers to a State or local agency under the provisions of sec- tion 706(c) or (d), the charge must be filed within 30 days after the person aggrieved receives notice that the State or local agency has terminated its proceedings, or within 210 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred, whichever is earlier. This subsection as amended provides that charges be filed within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice. Court deci- sions under the present law have shown an inclination to interpret this time limitation so as to give the aggrieved person the maxi- mum benefit of the law; it is not intended that such court decisions should be in any way circumscribed by the extension of the time limitations in this subsection. Existing case law which was determined that certain types of violations are continuing in nature, thereby measuring the running of the re- quired time period from the last occurrence of the discrimination and not from the first occurrence is continued, and other interpre- tations of the courts maximizing the cover- age of the law are not affected. It is intended by expanding the time period for filing charges in this subsection that aggrieved in- dividuals, who frequently are untrained lay- men and who are not always aware of the diacrimination which is practiced against them, should be given a greater opportunity to prepare their charges and file their com- plaints and that existent but undiscovered acts of discrimination should not escape the effect of the law through a procedural over- sight. Moreover, wide latitude should be given individuals in such cases to avoid any prejudice to their rights as a result of government inadvertence, delay or error. The time period for filing a charge where deferral is required to a State or local anti- discrimination agency has been extended to 300 days after the alleged unlawful employ- ment practice occurred or to 30 days after the State or local agency has terminated pro- ceedings under the State or local law, which- ever is earlier. This subsection also restates the provision of Section 706(b) requiring a notice of the charges to the respondent with- in ten days after its having been filed. Section 706(f)?This subsection, which is new, sets forth the enforcement procedures which may be followed in those cases where the Commission has been unable to achieve voluntary compliance with the provisions of the Act. Section 706(f) (1)?Under this subsection, if the respondent is not a government, gov- ernmental agency, or political subdivision and if the Commission is unable to secure a conciliation agreement that is acceptable to the Commission within 30 days from the filing of the charge or within 30 days after expiration of any period of reference under subsetcion (c) or (d) it may thereafter bring a civil action against the respondent in an appropriate district court. In cases involving a government, governmental agency, or polit- ical subdivision, the Commission will not bring the case before a Federal District Court. After the Commission has had an opportunity to complete its investigation, and to attempt conciliation, the Commission shall then refer the case to the Attorney General who may bring the case to court. The aggrieved party is permitted to inter- vene In any case brought by the Commission or the Attorney General under this sub- section. With respect to cases arising under this subsection, if the Commission: (a) has dis- missed the charge, or (b) 180 days have elapsed from the fil,ing of the charge with- out the Commission, or the Attorney Gen- eral, as the case may be, having filed a com- plaint under section 706(f), or without the Commission having entered into a concilia- tion agreement to which the person aggrieved is a party (i.e. a signatory) the person ag- grieved may bring an action in an appro- priate district court within 90 days after receiving notification. The retention of the private right of action, as amended, is intend- ed to make clear that an individual aggrieved by a violation of Title VII should not be forced to abandon the claim merely because of a decision by the Commission or the At- torney General as the case may be, that there are insufficient grounds for the Government to file a complaint. Moreover, It is designed to make sure that the person aggrieved does not have to endure lengthy delays if the Commission or Attorney General does not act with due diligence and speed. Accord- ingly, the provisions described above allow the person aggrieved to elect to pursue his Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 8, 1972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?HOUSE 11 1863 or her own remedy under this title in the courts where there is agency inaction, dalli- ance or dismissal of the charge, or unsatis- factory resolution. It is hoped that recourse to the private lawsuit will be the exception and not the rule, and that the vast majority of com- plaints will be handled through the offices of the EEOC or the Attorney General, as ap- propriate. However, as the individual's rights to redress are paramount under the pro- visions of Title VII it is necessary that all avenues be left open for quick and effec- tive relief. In. any civil action brought by an ag- grieved person, or in the case of a charge filed by a member of the Commission, by any person whom the charge alleges was ag- grieved, the court may upon timely appli- cation of the complainant, appoint an at- torney and authorize the commencement of the action without the payment of fees, costs, or security in such circumstances as it deems just. The Commission, or the At- torney General in case involving a govern- mental entity, upon timely application and subject to the court's discretion, may inter- vene in such a private action if it is certified that the private action is of general public importance. In addition, the court is given discretion to stay proceedings for not more than 60 days pending the termination of State or local proceedings or efforts by the Commission to obtain voluntary compliance. In establishing the enforcement provisions under this subsection and subsection 706(f) generally, it is not intended that any of the provisions contained therein shall affect the present Use of class action lawsuits under Title VII in. conjunction with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The courts have been particularly cognizant of the fact that claims under Title VII involve the vin- dication of a major public interest, and that any action under the Act involves consider- ations beyond those raised by the individual claimant. As a consequence, the leading cases in this area to date have recognized that many Title VII claims are necessarily class action complaints and that, accord- ingly, it is not necessary that each individual entitled to relief be named in the original charge or in the claim for relief. A provision limiting class actions was contained in the House bill and specifically rejected by the Conference Committee, Section 706(1)(2)?This subsection au- thorizes the Commission or the Attorney General, in .. case involving a government, a governmental agency or political subdivi- sion, based upon a preliminary investigation of a charge filed, to bring an action for ap- propriate temporary or preliminary relief, pending the final disposition of the charge. Such actions are to be assigned for hearing at the earliest possib. date and expedited in every way. The provisions of Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures shall apply to actions brought under this subsection. The importance of preliminary relief in actions involving violations of Title VII is central to ensuring that persons aggrieved under this title are adequately protected and that the provisions of this Act are being fol- lowed. Where violations become apparent and prompt judicial action is necessary to insure these provisions, the Commission or the Attorney General, as the case may be, should not hesitate to invoke the provisions of this s-,bsection. Section 706 (f) (3)?This subsection, which is similar to the present section 706(f) of the Act, grants the district courts jurisdic- tion over actions brought by the EEOC, the Attorney General or aggrieved persons under this title and' provides the venue require- ments. Such jurisdiction includes the power to grant such temporary or preliminary re- lief as the court deems just and proper. Section 706(1) (4) and (5)?Under these paragraphs, the chief judge is required to designate a district judge to hear the case. If no judge is available, then the chief judge of the circuit assigns the judge. Cases are to be heard at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way. If the judge has not scheduled the case for trial within 120 days after issue has been joined he may appoint a master to hear the case under Rule 53 of the Federal Rules o Civil Procedure. The pur- pose of this provision is to relax the very strongest requirements of Rule 53 which preclude appointment of a master except in extremely unusual cases. Section 706(g)?This subsection is similar to the present section 706(g) of the Act. It authorizes the court, upon a finding that the respondent has engaged in or is engaging in an unlawful employment practice, to enjoin the respondent from such unlawful conduct and order such affirmative relief as may be appropriate including, but not limited to, reinstatement or hiring, with or without back pay, as will effectuate the policies of the Act. I3ackpay is limited to that which accrues from a date not more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Com- mission. Interim earnings or amounts earn- able with reasonable diligence by the ag- grieved person (s) would operate to reduce the backpay otherwise allowable. The provisions of this subsection are in- tended to give the courts wide discretion exercising their equitable powers to fash- ion the most complete relief possible. In dealing with the present section 706(g) the courts have stressed that the scope of relief under that section of the Act is intended to make the victims of unlawful discrimina- tion whole, and that the attainment of this objective rests not only upon the elimination of the particular unlawful employment prac- tice complained of, but also requires that persons aggrieved by the consequences and effects of the unlawful employment practice be, so far as possible, restored to a position where they would have been were it not for the unlawful discrimination. SECTION 5 This section amends section 707, concern- ing the Attorney General's "pattern or prac- tice" authority to provide for a transfer of the "pattern or practice" jurisdiction to the Commission two years after the enactment of the bill. The bill further provides the Com- missibn with concurrent jurisdiction in this area from the date of enactment until the transfer is complete. The transfer is subject to change in accordance with a Presidential reorganization plan if not vetoed by Congress. The section would provide that currently pending proceedings would continue without abatement, that ail court orders and decrees remain in effect, and that upon the transfer the Commission would be substituted as a party for the United States of America or the Attorney General as appropriate. Under the provisions of this section, the Commission's present powers to investigate charges of discrimination remain. In addi- tion, it now has jurisdiction to initiate court action to correct any pattern or practice violations. SECTION 6 This section amends section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, entitled "Investiga- tions, Inspections, Records, State Agencies." Section 709(a)?This subsection, which gives the Commission the right to examine and copy documents in connection with its investigation of a charge, would remain un- changed. Section 709 (b) ?Tills subsection would au- thorize the Commission to cooperate with State and local fair employment practice agencies in order to carry out the purposes of the title, and to enter into agreements with such agencies under which the Commis- sion would refrain from processing certain types of charges or relieve persons from the record keeping requirements. This subsection would make two changes in the present statute. Under this subsection, the Commis- sion could, within the limitations of funds appropriated for the purpose, also engaged in and contribute to the cost of research and other projects undertaken by these State and local agencies and pay these agencies in ad-. vance for services rendered to the Commis- sion. The subsection also deletes the refer- ence to private civil actions under section 706(e) of the present statute. Section 709(c)?This subsection, like the present statute, would require employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor-management apprenticeship committee subject to the title to make and keep certain records and to make reports to the Commission. Under the present statute, a party required to keep records could seek an exemption from these requirements on the ground of undue hardship either by ap- plying to the Commission or bringing a civil action in the district court. This subsection would require the party seeking the exemp- tion first to make an application to the Com- mission and only if the Commission denies the request could the party bring an action in the district court. This subsection would also authorize the Commission to apply for a court order compelling compliance with the record keeping and reporting obligations set forth in the subsection. Section 706(d)?This subsection would eliminate the present exemption from record keeping requirements for those employers In States and political subdivisions with equal employment opportunity laws or for employers subject to Federal executive order or agency record keeping requirements. Under this subsection, the Commission would consult with interested State and other Fed- eral agencies in order to coordinate the Fed- eral record keeping requirement under sec- tion 709(c) with those adopted by such agencies. The subsection further provides that the Commission furnish to such agencies information pertaining to State and local fair employment agencies, on condi- tion that the information would not be made public prior to the institution of State or local proceedings. SECTION 7 This section amends section 710 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by deleting the pres- ent section 710 and substituting therefor and to the extent appropriate the provisions of section'll of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. I 161). By making this sub- stitution, the Commission's present demand power with respect to witnesses and evidence Is repealed, and the power to subpoena wit- nesses and evidence, and to allow any of its designated agents, agencies or members to issue such subpoenas, as necessary for the conduct of any investigation, and to take testimony under oath is substituted. SECTIONS 8 (a) AND (b) These subsections would amend sections 703(a) and 703(c) (2) of the present statute to make it clear_ that discrimination against applicants for employment and applicants for membership in labor organizations is an unlawful employment practice. This subsec- tion is merely declaratory of present laws as contained in the decisions in Phillips v. Martin-Marietta Corp., 400 U.S. 542 (1971) ; U.S. v. Sheet Metal Workers International Assn., Local 36, 416 F. 2d 123 (8th Cir. 1969); Asbestos Workers, Local 53 V. Vogler, 407 F. 2d 1047 (5th Cir. 1969). SECTIONS 8(C) ( 1) AND (2) These subsections would amend section 704(a) and (b) of the present statute to make clear that joint labor-management ap- prenticeship committees are covered by those provisions which relate to discriminatory ad- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1864 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE March 8, 1972 vertising and retaliation against individuals participating in Commission proceedings. SECTION 8(d) This subsection would amend section 705 (a) of the present statute to permit a meal- her of the Commission to serve until his suc- cessor is appointed but not for more than 60 days when Congress is in session unless the successor has been nominated and the nomination submitted to the Senate, or after the adjournment sine die of the session of the Senate in which such nomination was submitted. The rest of the subsection provides that the Chairman of the Commission on behalf of the Commission, would be responsible, ex- cept as provided in section 705 (b) , for the administrative operations of the Commission and for the appointment of such officers, agents, attorneys, hearing examiners, and other employees of the Commission, in ac- cordance with Federal law, as he deems nec- essary. SECTION 8(e) This subsection would provide a new sec- tion 705(b) of the Act which establishes a General Counsel appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a four (4) year term. The responsibilities of the General Counsel would include, in addition to those the Commission may pre- scribe and as provided by law, the conduct of all litigation as provided in sections 706 and 707 of the Act. The concurrence of the General Counsel with the Chairman is re- quired, on the reapportionment and super- vision of regional attorneys. This subsection would also continue the General Counsel on the effective date of the Act in that position until a successor has been appointed and qualified. The Commission's attorneys may at the Commission's direction appear for and rep- resent the Commission in any case in court, 'except that the Attorney General shall con- duct all litigation to which the Commission is a party to in the Supreme Court pursuant to this title. SECTION 8 (f ) This subsection would eliminate the pro- vision in present section 705(g) authorizing the Commission to request the Attorney General to intervene in private civil actions. Instead, this subsection permits the Com- mission itself to intervene in such civil ac- tions as provided in section 706..Where the respondent is a government, governmental agency or political subdivision, the Attorney General should be authorized to seek inter- vention. SECTION 8 ( g) This section amends sections 714 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by making the provisions of sections 111 and 1114 of Title 18, United States Code, applicable to officers, agents and employees of the Com- mission in performance of their official duties. This section also specifically pro- hibits the imposition of the death penalty on any person who might be convicted of killing an officer, agent or employee of the Commission while on his official duties. SECTION 9 (a), (b), (c), AND (d) These subsections would raise the execu- tive level of the Chairman of the Commis- sion _(from Level 4 to level 3) and the mem- bers of the Commission (from Level 5 to Level 4) and include the General Counsel (Level 5) in the executive pay scale, so as to place them in a position of parity with officials in comparable positions in agencies having substantially equivalent powers such as the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Power Commission. SECTION 10 Section 715?This section, which is new, establishes an Equal Employment Opportu- nity Coordinating Council composed of the Secretary of Labor, the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Attorney General, the Chairman of the United States Civil Service Commission and the Chairman of the United States Civil Rights Commission or their respective des- ignees. The Coutcil will have the responsi- bility to coordinate the activities of all the various branches of government with respon- sibility for equal employment opportunity. The Council will submit an annual report to the President and Congress including a sum- mary of its activities and recommendations as to legislative or administrative changes which It considers desirable. SECTION 11 Section 717(a) ?This subsection provides that all personnel actions of the U.S. Govern- ment affecting employees or applicants for employment shall be free from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Included within this coverage are ex- ecutive agencies, the United States Postal Service, the Postal Rate Commission, certain departments of the District of Columbia Government, the General Accounting Office, Government Printing Office and the Library of Congress. Section 717(b)?Under this subsection, the Civil Serivce Commission is given the author- ity to enforce the provisions of subsection (a), except with respect to Library of Con- gress employees. The Civil Service Commis- sion would be authorized to grant appro- priate remedies which may include, but are not limited to, back pay for aggrieved appli- cants or employees. Any remedy needed to fully recompense the employee for hi?., loss, both financial and professional, is considered appropriate under this subsection. The Civil Service Commission is also granted authority to issue rules and regulations necessary to carry out its responsibilities under this sec- tion. The Civil Service Commission shall also annually review national and regional equal employment opportunity plans and be re- sponsible for review and evaluation of all agency equal employment opportunity pro- grams. Agency and executive department heads and officers of the District of Colum- bia shall comply with such rules and regula- tions, submit an annual equal employment opportunity plan and notify any employee or applicant of any final action taken on any complaint of discrimination filed. Section 717(c) and (d)?The provisions of sections 706(f) through (k) , concerning pri- vate civil actions by aggrieved persons, are made applicable to aggrieved Federal em- ployees or applicants for employment. Such persons would be permitted to file a civil ac- tion within 30 days of notice of final action by an agency or by the Civil Service Commis- sion or an appeal from the agency's decision, or after 180 days from the filing of an initial charge with the agency, or the Civil Service Commission. Section 717(e)?This subsection provides that nothing in this Act relieves any Govern- ment agency or official of his or its existing equal employment opportunity obligations under the Constitution, other statutes, or under any Executive Order relating to equal employment opportunity in the Federal Gov- ernment. SECTION 12 This section allows the Chairman of the Commission to establish ten additional posi- tions at the GS-16, GS-17 and GS-18 levels, as needed to carry out the purposes of this Act. SECTION 13 A new Section 718 is added which provides that no government contract, or portion thereof, can "be denied, withheld, termi- nated, or superseded by a government agency under Executive Order 11246 or any other order or law without according the respective employer a full hearing and adjudication pursuant to 5 U.S.C. ? 654 et. seq where such employer has an affirmative action program for the same facility which had been accepted by the Government within the previous twelve months. Such plan shall be deemed to be accepted by the Government if the appropriate compliance agency has accepted such plan and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance has not disapproved of such plan within 45 days. However, an employer who substantially deviates from any such pre- viously accepted plan is excluded from the protection afforded by this section. SECTION 14 This section provides that the amended provisions of Section 706 would apply to charges filed with the Commission prior to the effective date of this Act. (Mr. PERKINS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 min- utes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ERLENBORN). (Mr. ERLENBORN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ERLENBORN. Mr. Speaker, I take the floor today to support the conference report on H.R. 1746. As I Mentioned earlier today, I am not entirely happy with the results of the conference. Out of some 21 major dif- ferences between the House and the ren- ate, the House conferees or a majority of them, though not all, gave in to the Senate 18 times while the House main- tained its position three times. It is not as good a record, I must say, in all honesty, as I would like to have come back to the House with. I guess I should also say that we must be quite thankful we won our point on the floor of the House and the Senate on the major issue, or that, of course, would have also been lost in conference; but we have won that point. I refer to the question of whether the EEOC should have cease-and-desist authority or au- thority to go into court to enforce a com- plaint that title 7 of the Civil Rights Act has been violated. Since that was won in both the House and Senate on the floor and the conference report therefore includes court enforcement provision, which was the key provision, I do sup- port the conference report. There are a few things I would like to discuss concerning the conference re- port, but first I will be happy to yield to my colleague from Indiana. Mr. DENNIS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to simply say that one of the things which I am afraid you did yield on which concerns me and gives me real reservations about this confer- ence report is the matter of applying this law down to the small employer who only has 15 people or less working for him. Now, a law of this kind, whatever its beneficial objective, is a great trouble and harassment, as the gentleman knows, to people in business. Large corporations can probably live with it, but it is a great imposition on the small businessmen on Main Street that you and I represent to have to be hailed into court and pay lawyers like myself, as well as account- ants, and so forth. It is a great regret to me that the House receded down to that point where Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March' 8, 1972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE H 1865 we are going to bother every little fellow on the street with five or six employees. Mr. ERLENBORN. I thank the gentre- man for his contribution. All I can say is that it could have been worse. The original bill reported by our committee?which was rejected on the floor when the substitute was adopted? would have reduced the coverage down to eight. The bill as passed by the Senate reduces coverage to 15 employees. This is con- trasted to 25 employees as is presently in the law. In the conference we did recede to the Senate and adopted the figure of 15. I think it might have been reasonable at that point to compromise at 20 employees or even try to hold it to 25, but the ma- jority of the conferees of the House did recede to the Senate on the figure of 15. Mr. STEIGER of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ERLENBORN. Yes; I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin. (Mr. STEIGER of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. STEIGER of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I simply want to acknowledge the lead- ership that has been exhibited by the gentleman in the well, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ERLENEORN). I signed the conference report. I must admit that I am not happy about all of the con- cessions that were made. However, I think on balance it does provide a needed strengthening of the EEOC. For that reason I urge the support of the House of the conference report. On balance, however, I must say in all honesty, if it had not been for the kind of work that was done both here in the House and in the other body, my fear would be that we would not have been able to come out with as good a product as this one represents. I do want to pay tribute to the gen- tleman from Illinois for what he has done for so long in working with this bill and in helping strengthen the work of the EEOC. Mr. ERLENBORN. I thank the gen- tleman for his kind words and also ac- knowledge the help which he has given to me and other members of the com- mittee all along on this bill. Mr. Speaker, one of the other areas where additional coverage would be in- cluded as a result of the conference re- port is the extension of the authority of the Federal EEOC to State and local gov- ernmental employees. There was an amendment adopted in the conference committee, an amendment to the bill as it came out of the other body, and I think it was a good amendment and I am happy that the conference did adopt it. In extending cbverage to State and local employees the House bill, as re- ported, and the bill in the other body just made a blanket extension to small State and local employees without any exception. It was pointed out on the floor of the other body that this would even cover elected officials at the State and local level. In other words, it would have been conceivable when the mayor won his race as mayor of the city that the losing candidate-- The SPEAKER. The time of the gen- tleman from Illinois has expired. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 5 additional minutes. Mr. ERLENBORN. As I was saying, the losing candidate could conceivably go to the Commission and charge that he lost the race because there was discrimina- tion against him because of race, sex, or national origin and if the Commission had cease-and-desist powers, they could vitiate the election. I think that would probably not be the case but it would have been possible and they could have seated the defeated candidate. In the other body, an exemption was made for elected officials and immediate legal advisers. In the conference, an ad- ditional qualification was added, exempt- ing those people appointed by officials at the State and local level in policy- making positions. I think this represents another good provision that the conference added in the report. In the extension of this authority to State and local employees, it was also made clear that the Attorney General would have the authority to bring the action in court rather than the attorneys for the Commission. This was made ex- plicit in the bill as it was passed in the other body. Besides this, there is a trans- fer of jurisdiction for pattern of practice matters from the Attorney General to the Commission in a phase program over the next 2 years. I think we should make it clear that at least this conferee believes it was the intention of the conference that in the case where a pattern or practice action is brought against State or local officials that suit should be brought by the At- torney General rather than by the Com- mission. There seems to be a conflict here, a conflict of jurisdiction going to the Commission by the suits against local units of government, that the authority to bring them rests in the Attorney Gen- eral. I believe the latter should take precedence in the pattern or practice actions against a unit of local or State government, it should be brought by the Attorney General. I believe that was the intention of the conference. Educational institutions will now be covered as a result of receding to the Senate bill. Religious institutions will be covered, but with a broad exemption for anyone employed by the religious in- stitution rather than only those people who might be utilized in religious work per se. So that I think it was clearly the thought of the conference that if a religi- ous institution is engaged in a profitmak- ing venture they still are not covered by the provisions of this act. I did agree with one of the places where we receded to the Senate in extending coverage to joint labor-management committees. These are committees that often operate the programs of appren- ticeships, particularly in the building trades, and up until the present time they have not been covered in the defini- tion. I think they should be. If there is any place where discrimination is prac- ticed, I think clearly it has been prac- ticed in the apprenticeship programs. So, extending the authority to the EEOC into this area is I think a good thing. I will not take the time to go through all of the rest of the differences between the House and the Senate. Let me reiterate that some three pro- visions of the House prevailed over the Senate where some 18 Senate provisions prevailed over the House. It is hardly even-handed, and it hardly is the sort of record to give confidence on the part of the Members of the House generally in the conferees appointed by the Com- mittee on Education and Labor. I hope that that committee will have a better record some time in the future. I think the lack of confidence that is generated by conferences such as this lead to actions such as were taken earlier today on the floor of the House in in- structing conferees from the Committee on Education and Labor concerning the higher education bill. I do not like the practice; but if I want to accomplish legislatively what I think this House wants, I may fmd my- self in the position of having to file a motion to instruct conferees from the Committee on Education and Labor based on the kind of record that they have established in this conference, and in the past. Mr. CORMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ERLENBORN. I yield to the gentleman from California. Mr. CORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of the gentleman from Illinois whether he thinks that the At- torney General would be more vigorous or less vigorous than the Commission in the bringing of suits. Mr. ERLENBORN. I do not know how you would define "vigorous." I can tell you this: the Attorney General in the pattern or practice suits under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, since its passage, has not lost one suit. The num- ber of cases is not exceptionally great, but the number of people affected has been, because pattern or practice can cover many people in one case. The At- torney General has had an excellent rec- ? ord in this area, under both administra- tions. This is not in any way a partisan comment. Mr. CORMAN. If the gentleman will yield further, the gentleman raised a point as to where we are putting the jurisdiction, and I just wondered whether we got better enforcement from the Attorney General. Mr. ERLENBORN. Let me allay the gentleman's fears as to whether that was the reason for it. The rationale behind giving the Attorney General the author- ity to bring suit in the cases affecting State and local governments is that there could be a constitutional conflict as to whether a Commission would have authority The SPEAKER. The time of the gentle- man from Illinois has expired. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 ad- ditional minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ERLENBORN). Mr. ERLENBORN. It is because there Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP731300296R000400100021-4 111866 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?HOUSE March 8, 1972 could be a constitutional conflict as to whether an administrative agency of the Federal Government could exercise au- thority against State and local elected officials. It did seem clear that the Attorney General could bring suit in the Federal court in those cases. That is my juris- diction was extended to the Attorney General to bring suit where State and lo- cal units of government are involved. The point I am trying to make is the apparent conflict between this and the transfer of the pattern 15r practice juris- diction that the Attorney General now exercises. It is my feeling that the con- ferees intended that the Attorney Gen- eral have the pattern or practice juris- diction as it affects the State and local units of government. Mr. CORMAN. I am still not quite cer- tain as to whether the gentleman felt there ought to be a transfer because of the vigorous enforcement of the Attorney General or whether the gentleman thought the Commission was too vigor- ous in the first place. Mr. ERLENBORN. I think the Attor- ney General's record has been good. The judgment was made to take the pattern or practice jurisdiction from him, but I think the decision has also been made that where the State and local units are concerned, the Attorney Gen- eral should bring suit. Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gen- tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. DENT). (Mr. DENT asked and was given per- mission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. DENT. Mr. Speaker and Members, I am here today, first, to thank the mem- bers of the conference committee on both sides for taking a very broadminded view of the problem that we faced. I think this is one of the finest con- ferences I have served on in many years. We tried to thrash out and solve the problems on the basis of give and take and understanding. There were quite a few differences between the provisions in the House passed bill and the Senate passed bill. However, the conferees, in what I think was a very unselfish and statesmanlike approach, developed for the House and the Senate a piece of legislation that all the conferees of both the House and Sen- ate were able to sign willingly. There were some major differences in some of the provisions dealing with en- forcement. We did not see quite eye to eye on them, but we ended up with a much better provision than the provision contained in the old act. We hope that the thousands of cases that are piling up will now be taken up and that the backlog of cases and new cases that come before the Commission can be handled expeditiously. The bill, H.R. 1746, as reported by the conference committee represents 5 years of legislative activity during which time several attempts were made to adopt some form of enforcement procedures which the EEOC could effectively use to enforce title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This conference report represents the result of a very active bipartisan effort to achieve meaningful employment op- portunities for all citizens in this Nation. As such, I honestly believe it reflects the efforts of both the House and Senate to- ward this end. Mr. Speaker, I want to pause just a moment to give my regards and respect to the gentleman from California (Mr. HAWKINS) who has been working night and day for the passage of this legisla- tion for the better part of 5 years, taking upon himself the chores that I, as chair- man, could not take on because of the press of other committee business. If anybody is to be considered the prime mover in getting this legislation to this point today so that we can vote for It and be assured that we are doing some- thing toward enforcing equal employ- ment opportunities in our country, it is Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, will the _ distinguished gentleman from Pennsyl- vania yield? Mr. DENT. I am happy to yield to the chairman. Mr. PERKINS. First, let me state that the untiring work and the determined efforts of the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania brought about, more than anything else, the important legis- lation that we have on the floor today. He succeeded because of his great effort and those of the gentleman from Cali- fornia (Mr. HAwmws). They have lived with this legislation over a period of years, and I certainly do not want to detract one particle from the good work of the minority in connection with this legislation. But above everyone else, the distinguished gentleman from Pennsyl- vania (Mr. DENT) stayed on top of this legislation. He stayed with it and never gave in even when that appeared to be the wisest and practical thing to do. This legislation is a great tribute to the distinguished chairman of the sub- committee (Mr. DENT). He has devoted great effort and long service trying to get the legislation enacted. I certainly want to pay my compliments to the dis- tinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania and to his entire subcommittee for a job well done. Mr. DENT. Thank you very kindly, Mr. Chairman, and I am sure that all mem- bers of the committee recognize your ever-present help at any time we needed it during consideration of the measure. I also want to pay my respects to the ranking minority member, who probably is the best "devil's advocate" in the whole Congress of the United States, because. if there are any faults in any legislation of ours, JOHN ERLENBORN will find them. I sometimes find fault with my colleague from Illinois because I sometimes think he finds fault when there is no fault to be found. But in the final analysis he does do his homework. In every instance where we have had a knotty problem to Iron out, he has been of great help. The bill provides for the much-needed expansion of coverage of title VII to in- clude employees of educational institu- tions. State and local governments, and employers, and labor organizations with 15 or more employees or members. The special position of State and local gov- ernmental employers has been recog- nized, however, by a specific exemption for certain State and local government employees, as well as a requirement that State and local agencies may only be sued by the Attorney General. Changes have also been introduced in the prohi- bition against religious discrimination which represent improvements over the present law. Certain needed changes in the provi- sions for the filing of charges with the Commission have also been introduced. These would allow a charge to be filed on behalf of an aggrieved individual and provide for a longer period of time during which the charge may be filed. The posi- tions of both the House and Senate bills regarding the ability of the individual to sue when the Commission's action is unsatisfactory and the ability of the courts to grant preliminary relief, where appropriate, have been retained. The key to the whole legislation is the enforcement powers granted to the Com- mission, the ability to go into the Federal district courts to enforce compliance with the act. This enforcement proposal, which was essentially the same in both House and Senate versions of the bill, is that which this Congress has agreed to as best for the EEOC. While originally I, and many of my colleagues on this floor, favored the administrative cease- and-desist enforcement approach over that of court enforcement, I am now sat- isfied that, along with the other provi- sions Contained in the legislation, the EEOC would be given sufficient tools to enforce the provisions of title VII. The conference bill contains addition- al provisions which I consider vital to the effective enforcement of title VII. It would, 2 years after enactment, trans- fer the Justice Department's "pattern or practice" jurisdiction to the EEOC. This provision would eliminate the over- lapping enforcement powers which would otherwise be inevitable if both the EEOC and Justice Department could bring suits to enforce violations of title VII. The jurisdiction to sue State or local govern- ments would, however, remain solely with the Justice Department so that no overlap would occur in this area. The conference report also retains cer- tain important provisions with respect to recordkeeping and Federal-State rela- tions regarding equal employment op- portunities enforcement. The com- promise also provides certain added pro- tections for employees of the agencies responsible for enforcing title VII. This legislation would impose require- ments of due process on the Federal contract compliance program for the first time. While I am not completely happy with the way the bill has turned out, the ma- jority of the Congress has spoken. The conferees have spoken. So I compliment them for at least getting to that point where we have made some advancement in enforcement. We have come out with a piece of work that I think will stand a long time. We may now very well be on the road to a more peaceful existence in the field of employment in this country as a result of this bill. Most people just want to work. That is all. They want an opportunity to work. We are trying to see that all of us, no Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 8, 1972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE H 1867 matter of what race, sex, or religious or ethnic background, will have equal op- portunity in employment. This bill has been a long time coming. I hope the House will accept this legisla- tion and the work of the conferees. Again I thank both the minority and the majority members of the conference for their great support of the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I include the following: PROCEDURE WHERE NO STATE EQUAL EMPLOY- MENT OPPORTUNITY LAW EXISTS (1) A charge must be filed within 180 days after the occurrence of an alleged unlawful employment practice. (2) After a charge is filed, the Commission must serve a notice of the charge on the respondent within ten days. (3) The Commission must then investigate the charge, after which it must make a deter- mination whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true. The Com- mission shall make its determination of rea- sonable cause as promptly as possible and, so far as practicable, within 120 days. (4) If it finds no reasonable cause, the Commission must dismiss the charge: if it finds reasonable cause, it will attempt to con- ciliate the case. (5) If the Commission is unable to secure a conciliation agreement, that is acceptable to the Commission, it may bring a civil action against any respondent in an appropriate federal district ? court. In the case of a respondent which is a government, govern- mental agency or political subdivision, the Commission shall take no further action and notify the Attorney General who may bring a civil action. (6) If the court finds that a respondent is engaging in an unlawful employment prac- tice charged in the 'complaint, the court may enjoin the respondent from engaging in the unlawful employment practice and grant such affirmative relief as it may deem appro- priate including, but not limited to, rein- statement, with or without backpay. Back- pay liability is limited, however, to no more than that accrued during the two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commis- sion. (7) In the event that the Commission dis- misses a charge or if within 180 days from the filing of the charge the Commission or the Attorney General has not filed a civil action or entered into a conciliation agreement to which the aggrieved person is a party, the Commission or the Attorney General will notify the aggrieved party. Within ninety days after the receipt of such notice the per- son aggrieved may bring a civil action against the respondent. Should such a private action be brought, the Commission or the Attorney General (where a government or political subdivision was involved) may seek to in- tervene in the action. PROCEDURES WHERE STATE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY LAW EXISTS (1) A charge must be filed within 180 days after the occurrence of an alleged unlawful employment practice. If a charge is i itially filed with a state or local agency, such charge must be filed with the Commission within 300 days after the alleged unlawful practice has occurred or within 30 days after receipt of notice that the state or local agency has terminated its proceedings. (2) Where a state or local equal employ- ment statute exists, the EEOC must wait 60 days after state or local proceedings have been commenced, unless those proceedings have been terminated sooner, before it can act on a charge. The deferral period is ex- tended to 120 days during the first year after enactment of a state or Weal law. (3) Once the deferred is concluded, the grommission must serve a notice of the charge on the respondent within ten days (presum- ably, this is duplicative of the state or local proceedings). (4) The Commission must then investi- gate the charge, afterwhich it must make a determination whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true. The Commission shall make its determination of reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, so far as practicable within 120 days. (5) If it finds no reasonable cause, the Commission must dismiss the charge; if it finds reasonable cause, it will attempt to conciliate the case. (6) If the Commission is unable to secure a conciliation agreement, that is acceptable to the Commission, it may bring a civil ac- tion against any respondent in an appropri- ate Federal district court. In the case of a respondent which is a government, govern- mental agency or political subdivision, the Commission shall take no further action and notify the Attorney General who may bring a civil action. (7) If the court finds that a respondent is engaging in an unlawful employment prac- tice charged in the complaint, the court may enjoin the respondent from engaging in the unlawful employment practice and grant such affirmative relief as it may deem appro- priate including, but not limited to, rein- statement, with or without backpay. Back- pay liability is limited, however, to no more than that accrued Tluring the two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commis- sion. (8) In the event that the Commission dis- misses a charge or if within 180 days from the filing of the charge the Commission or the Attorney General has not filed a civil action or entered into a conciliation agree- ment to which the aggrieved person is a party, the Commission or the Attorney Gen- eral will notify the aggrieved party. Within ninety days after the receipt of such notice the person aggrieved may bring a civil action against the respondent. Should such a pri- vate action be brought, the Commission or the Attorney General (where a government or political subdivision was involved) may seek to intervene in the action. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield my- self such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as we can see by reading the signatures on this report, the major- ity and the minority are together in sup- porting this conference report. The greatest amount of credit for putting the bill into a shape which I can support has to go to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ERLENBORN), not only for his work in this House, but also for his work with the Members of the other body in straightening out the matter. I say that as one who once introduced a bill giving cease, and desist enforcement powers to the EEOC, but I believe the action taken in this legislation is right, and, therefore, I am supporting it. The gentleman from Illinois has been most convincing. There are some provisions of the Sen- ate which, I think, are advantageous which the House accepted and which* I strongly support. I would say two that come to mind are the ones affecting re- ligion. One is the definition of religion and the other is the provision exempting employees of religious organizations. I think that was a good move on our part. There are some parts I do not like. If we had the chance to bring the bill back with a motion to recommit, I think I would have stood here and asked Mem- bers to recommit the bill back to the con- ference with instructions. I hope this body will take a look at the rules we Op- erate under, so that both Houses will have a chance on the conference report to recommit back to the conference if Members do not like some part of the bill. ? The part I feel especially is bad is the feature on the statute of limitations in this bill, which is not 2 years prior to en- actment of this bill, but rather 2 years prior to the charge being brought by any- one. Some of those may have been pend- ing for 2 or 3 years already, so we are talking now of probably 5 years in which back pay can be requested. I just do not think that was a wise decision. I think the House would have stood by the position of those of us who felt that this was unwise, and that the 2-year statute of limitations in this bill should have been 2 years prior to the enactment of the act. I think that would have been advisable. But we have to look at this report in total. The question is now whether we want to vote down the conference re- port because there are some parts we dis- agree with. I do not think we should do that. I think there is improvement for the EEOC in this bill, and we have to give credit to those who have been working on this. One of those who should be given great credit is the gentleman from Cali- fornia (Mr. HAWKINS) who really has taken the lead to give more strength to EEOC to eliminate discrimination. I think despite the fact that this is not everything he wanted, this is a substan- tial stride forward, and one in which he can also take pride as a result of the action of the committee. I urge support for the conference re- port. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 min- utes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. GROSS) . (Mr. GROSS asked and was given per- mission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, on page 21 of thesreport, I note this language: The Senate amendment provided the Com- mission with authorization for an additional 10 positions at GS-16. GS-17, and GS-18 level. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. Of course, "receded" means the House surrendered to the Senate. I wonder if there was any recognition on the part of the House Committee on Education and Labor that there is a committee of the Congress which is sup- posed to deal with supergrades, which is supposed to deal with pay increases and that sort of thing. I wonder if the gen- tleman from Kentucky could give me some reason why the House rolled over and played dead on this issue. Mr. PERKINS. Let me say to my dis- tinguished colleague? Mr. GROSS. I cannot hear the gentle- man. He is usually a little more vocal, at least a few decibels higher. Mr. PERKINS. Let me say to my dis- tinguished colleague from Iowa that af- ter the Senate put this provision in the bill? Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 11 1868 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE March 8, 1972 Mr. GROSS. I am aware of that. I just read the fact that they did. Mr. PERKINS. Let me make the ex- planation. I wrote to the chairman of the Post Office and Civil Service Com- mittee of the House, Congressman Dur.- sxi, and invited him to look the situation over, as to whether he felt the Commis- sion needed these additional people. Be that as it may, the conferees felt, in view of the broadening of the cover- age in the bill, that the number selected by the Senate was a reasonable number. It was the will of the conference that we give them some additional personnel that we felt they needed. I do not con- sider it .any surrender by any means, Mr. GROSS. If the Post Office and Civil Service Committee, which is the proper committee, should come along and take some of the employees away, or bring out legislation to take some of the employees away from this equal employ- ment opportunity setup, I can see the gentleman raising a little unshirtell hell around here over the fact that the juris- diction of his committee was being in- vaded. And that is precisely what you did here. Let me call your attention to some- thing else as we go along. Mr. PERKINS. I would much pre- fer? Mr. GROSS. Just a minute. I will yield to the gentleman later. The House just sent the Higher Edu- cation Act to conference. When that bill originally came to the House it contained numerous provisions authorizing em- ployment of personnel without regard to the civil service and classification laws, and it provided for numerous additional positions in grades 16 through 18, which of course are the supergrades. The gen- tleman from North Carolina (Mr. HEN- DERSON) and the gentleman from Iowa, presently addressing the House, made points of order against that bill and knocked those provisions out. Now you are going to conference with the other body, and I have no doubt that when you come back from that conference there will be many more supergrades. You will have fattened that bill along with this one, and will have done so without any regard for the jurisdiction of the proper committee of the Congress. . Mr. DENT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. GROSS. Yes, I yield, if the gentle- man has any reasonable explanation for Invading the jurisdiction of the com- mittee. Mr. DENT. The gentleman will have to be the judge of whether it is reasonable or not, but it is not a precedent-setting action here. Mr. GROSS. I did not say anything about a precedent. I said it was overstep- ping the committee. The SPEAKER. The time of the gen- tleman from Iowa has expired. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield me 3 additional min- utes? Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 ad- ditional minutes to the gentleman from Iowa. Mr. DENT. May I be permitted to an- swer? Mr. GROSS. Yes, certainly. Mr. DENT. This House without ques- tion or any discussion, when it created the Commission on Aging, created the grade jobs that were required to perform the duties we prescribed under the Com- missioner on Aging. This is another Com- mission. If the jobs are not created in the legislation we bring forth we would not have anybody to administer the act and the provisions we put into the bill. This has gone on ever since I have been a Member of Congress, where we create new duties and create jobs to go with them. We did not overstep our jur- isdiction. The Senate put it in, very frankly. Mr. GROSS. You accepted it, did you not? Your responsibility is equal to theirs, in the conference. Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. GROSS. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina. (Mr. DULSKI, on request of Mr. HEN- DERSON, was granted permission to extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and to include extraneous matter.) Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed to learn that the conferees have retained the Senate provision au- thorizing additional supergrade posi- tions. Section 12 of the conference substitute authorizes the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission to place an additional 10 positions in grades 16, 17, and 18 of the General Schedule. Mr. Speaker, I realize that the ex- change of correspondence on the inclu- sion of the 10 additional supergrades which I had with the gentleman from Kentucky, Chairman PERKINS, came too late, since the conferees already had reached agreement. I appreciate the sug- gestion made by the gentleman from Kentucky in his letter of March 1, 1972, that our committee hold the necessary hearings and consider the justification for the 10 positions authorized. I will include copies of these letters as a part of my statement. ? Mr. Speaker, this is yet another exam- ple of legislation that is reaching the House floor with provisions that violate the statutory standards and controls re- lating to Federal employment. The Committee on Post Office and Civil Service has primary jurisdiction over all matters relating to the civil service, in- cluding matters relating to the compen- sation, classification, and retirement of Federal employees. The standards, con- trols, and limitations relating to these matters are spelled out very specifically in title 5 of the United States Code. Our committee feels that any excep- tions to such statutory standards and controls should be granted only in the most unusual circumstances and only when fully justified before our commit- tee. In the present case we have had no request and no opportunity to consider whether there is any justification for authorizing 10 additional supergrades for the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission. I realize, of course, that little can be done at this point to eliminate the super- grade authority from the conference re- port. However, I would strongly advise the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission to forego the use of such authority until the Post Office and Civil Service Committee has had the oppor- tunity to consider the overall needs of the Government for additional supergrade positions. In that regard I wish to point out that on March 28, the Subcommittee on Man- power and Civil Service of the Post Office and Civil Service Committee will begin hearings on the administration's pro- posal to establish a Federal Executive Service. During the course of those hearings, I am going to ask the members of the sub- committee to give serious consideration to repealing all recently enacted provi- sions of law, such as the one we are now considering, which authorize additional supergrade positions, unless such super- grade authority was considered and ap- proved by our subcommittee. In lieu of the separate supergrade au- thorities which I will seek to have re- pealed, I will propose an increase in the aggregate number of supergrade posi- tions under section 5108(a) of title 5, United States Code, to take care of any additional supergrades that are proven to be needed pending completion of the study for the new Federal Executive Service. The letters follow: U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., February 29, 1972. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Wash- ington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In reviewing the pro- visions of the Senate amendment to H.R. 1746, the Equal Employment Opportunities Enforcement Act of 1972, I note that section 13 authorizes the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission to place an additional 10 positions in GS-16, GS-17, and GS-18. As I have indicated to you several times recently, this is the type of authorization which I am firmly convinced should be con- sidered by our Committee before being ap- proved by the House. We have had no re- quest and no opportunity to consider whether or not there is any justification for authorizing 10 additional supergrades for the Equal Employment Opportunities Com- mission. Mr. Henderson, Chairman of our Subcom- mittee on Manpower and Civil Service, has scheduled hearings to begin in March on the overall question of replacing the so-called supergrade positions with a new Federal Executive Service. At that time, a review will be made as to whether or not any addi- tional supergrades are needed pending com- pletion of the study for the new Federal Executive Service. Since we have received no request on be- half of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, and in view of the pending study. I strongly recommend that you and the conference of the House urge that the Conference Report not include authority for additional supergrades for the Equal Em- ployment Opportunities Commission. With kindest regards. Sincerely yours, THADDEUS J. DDLSKI, Chairman. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP731300296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 8, 1972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE H 1869 HOLTSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, March 1, 1972. Hon. THADDEUS J. DULSKI, Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D .0 . DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I am Sorry you and I did not have an opportunity to discuss earlier the provisions of the Senate amendment to H.H. 1746, the Equal Employment Opportuni- ties Enforcement Act of 1972. The Conferees on that matter completed their deliberations last night. The Confer- ence Report is, I understand, in page proof already and Chairman Williams of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare is most anxious to file the Conference Report today and have the Senate take up the meas- ure tomorrow. I can understand your concern about the authorization of itdditional super- grades for the Equal Employment Opportu- nities Commission. The possibility of your concern was, in fact, discussed by the Con- ferees on our side. Since the provision was in the Senate bill, however, and since the Parliamentarian's office assured us that the provision being in the Senate bill made it a conferencable item, we felt in the situation that existed yesterday evening when the mat- ter was considered that it was imperative that we take the Senate language. As I Indicated before, if I had received your communication of concern earlier than this morning we might have come to a different conclusion but under the circumstances it appears to be too late now to rpsolve the mat- ter as you desire. I would suggest, however, that Mr. Henderson, Chairman of your Sub- committee on Manpower and Civil Service, continue with his hearings on the replace- ment of the super-grade positions with the new Federal Executive Service, including his review of the need for additional supergrades pending completion of the study for the new Federal Executive Service. Specifically, I would recommend that he review the situa- tion of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission and I assure you that I will do everything I can to cooperate with him and with you in that connection. Obviously, if your Committee after review- ing the matter feels that the Conference has authorized an excessive number of super- grades or has authorized an insufficient number I would expect to give the same seri- ous consideration to the recommendations of your Committee that I always give the recommendations of any other Chairman of any other Committee. With best wishes, Sincerely, CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman. Mr. HENDERSON. I thank the gentle- man for yielding, and I want to say that I. too, agree with him that the jurisdic- tion of the Civil Service Committee of the House has not been abided by here. The legislative committees, of course, have the authority to grant the positions that may be needed, but here what they have done is set the salaries for those persons they determined to be required and have exempted them from the Civil Service Act without any testimony saying why they should be exempted. As the gentle- man from New York will convey to the Members of the House in his extension of remarks, he puts us on notice that our committee intends to do something about this, Mr. GROSS. They might at least have gone to the Civil Service Commission pool for supergrades rather than to es- tablish them by this process. Mr. HENDERSON. I thank the gentle- man for yielding. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I also note on page 9 of the report this language: SEC. 714. The provisions of sections 111 and 1114, title 18, United States Code, shall apply to officers, agents, and employees of the Com- mission in the performance of their official duties. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 111 and 1114 of title 18, United States Code, whoever in violation of the pro- visions of section 1114 of such title kills a person while engaged in or on account of the performance of his official functions under this Act shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life. Not even the language that is to be found in all statutes of this kind?not even the inclusion of "upon conviction." No one bothered to write into this provi- sion that an individual must first be tried and convicted before being sentenced to prison for life. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. DENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Speaker, in answer to the criticism about the job situation and supergrades, we did not say or do anything that has not been done before time and time again. What we said?or, rather, what the Senate insisted on?is that the Chair- man of the Economic Opportunity Com- mission, subject to standards and pro- cedures prescribed by this chapter, may place?may place?an additional 10 posi- tions in the Economic Opportunity Com- mission in GS-16, GS-1'7, and GS-18 for the purpOses of carrying out title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It says he may if it is needed. We heard absolutely nothing from any committee of the House until the day after the conference was over, when we received a note from Mr. DULSKI, the chairman of the Committee on Post Of- fice and Civil Service, and an answer was given to him by the chairman of our full committee, and all of the oversight on this particuar matter was taken into account. These jobs are still within the juris- diction of the Post Office and Civil Serv- ice Committee. We did not do anything but provide the jobs when needed to ful- fill the duties of the Commission. Mr. GROSS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr, DENT. I am happy to. Mr. GROSS. And you prObably did not have one word of evidence as to whether the 10 additional supergrades were needed. Did you? You took the word of the people across ,the way, and they prob- ably held no hearings and had no justi- fication as to whether a single supergrade was necessary. Mr. DENT. In answer to the gentle- man, I might say that if you go into a conference, and you do not have any re- gard for the other body's position, then you should never go into conference. You have to accept the view that they made the study. We did not make the study, I assure you. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Illinois 3 minutes. Mr. ERLENBORN. If the gentleman from Pennsylvania would respond to a question, I would appreciate it. Did I understand the gentleman cor- rectly a minute ago to say you did not hear from Chairman DuLsici until after the conference was completed? Mr. DENT. That is exactly what the chairman told me. I never heard from them at all. Mr. ERLENBORN. I thank the gen- tleman for that answer. It does surprise me, and maybe we should ask the chair- man of the committee (Mr. PERKINS), because I raised this question in the con- ference. Mr. DENT. That is right. Mr. ERLENBORN. And I was told that, "yes, they did have a letter from Chair- man DuLsicr," but that, "you know, he al- ways writes letters like that to show that he is trying to protect the jurisdic- tion of the committee, but we do not take it very seriously." I also recall it was agreed that, if Chairman DuLsicr were really serious about this, he would back down and re- move these provisions from the confer- ence report. Mr. DENT. I know that the gentleman from Illinois does not want to give the wrong impression; but, in order to stop it right at this point and get at what we believe to be the truth, with reference to this matter and with reference to the interchange between the chairman of the Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv- ice and the chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor, you know it has been said that a lie will get halfway around the world before the truth is known. The letter was not in the hands? ? Mr. ERLENBORN. Mr. Speaker, I ask for regular order. I would like to ask the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. PERKINS) : IS it not true that you advised us in the conference that you had received the letter from Chairman DuLsKr? I would be happy to yield to the gen- tleman, the chairman of the committee, to respond to that question. Mr. PERKINS. The chief clerk of the committee informs me that we had a letter from Mr. DuLsia on another sub- ject matter along the same lines, but on other legislation, not on this legislation, before we went to conference, but that the letter on this particular subject and on the conference report did not arrive until the day after we completed the conference. My recollection is refreshed by the clerk of the committee who answers the mail. Mr. ERLENBORN. I thank the gen- tleman for that answer. It was my under- standing from what the gentleman said in the conference that he knew Chair- man DuLsicr felt that this invaded the jurisdiction of his committee. I under- stood the gentleman in the conference to say he received a letter from the chairman and, if the chairman was seri- ous about it, it would be understood that this matter would be taken out of the bill. I just want the record to be straight. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, Will the gen- tleman yield? Mr. ERLENBORN. I yield to the gen- tleman from Minnesota. Mr. QUIE. As I recall the situation, the Senate conferees agreed that if a point of order could be raised against this section, or if a separate vote could be Approved For Release 2001/08/28: CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 1870 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?HOUSE held on the section, then they would recede. Since that was not the parlia- mentary situation they went ahead. So, there was full realization in the conference that this was a serious mat- ter and we were concerned about the Post Office and Civil Service Commit- tee's jurisdiction. Mr. DENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield my- self 1 minute. (Mr. DENT asked and was given per- mission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. DENT. The letter in question was the letter to the chairman dealing with the provisions of the Fair Labor Stand- ards Act, and covers civil employees un- der civil service. That was the letter that was talked about, but the chairman said he had a letter and it had nothing to do with this legislation. I am informed by the Clerk that we did not receive any remonstrance against this particular feature and had not re- ceived one single remonstrance having to do with three other instances con- tained in bills which were passed by this House. Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. CORMAN) (Mr. CORMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. CORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to conclude the thoughts which I started earlier in my exchange with the gentle- man from Illinois (Mr. ERLENBORN) . Specifically I wondered whether the con- ferees favored giving enforcement to the Attorney General rather than to the Commission, because they thought he would be more vigorous or less vigorous In protecting the rights of blacks against job discrimination. I must say that hiv- ing watched the former Attorney Gen- eral, Mr. Mitchell, for 31/2 years, if I were a black man I would not be as com- fortable with him representing me as I would be with the Commission repre- senting me. The gentleman from Illi- nois (Mr. ERLENBORN) pointed out that the former Attorney General has never lost a case in this field. I am reminded that when I went to law school we were told that if you never lose a lawsuit it may be because you are not trying enough of them. Mr. RARICK. Mr. Speaker, I had voted against this legislation when it was first considered and, if anything, it is worse now. Supposedly it seeks to eliminate all dis- crimination in hiring and employment practices but in reality and by actual experience the thrust of the legislation is to give special advantage to certain applicants and unqualified jobseekers. The real discrimination under this bill is against the employers, the investors, and the management people who know what jobs they have and the qualifications they seek but can be forced to accept the least qualified because the more qualified because the more qualified may be of the majority. The equal opportunity employment legislation would make discrimination Illegal and a crime. Yet, let us be honest about it, discrimination is an act of free- dom and I dare suggest that discrim- ination can never be removed from this country as long freedom remains in our land. I can never vote for a bill that gives special consideration to one group at the cost of denying freedom to another. Compensatory rights are nothing but special interest privileges, and to make this the law of our land is a mockery of morality even though it is camouflaged under the name of social justice. To those who sincerely feel that this legislation is necessary to help the un- skilled and untrained, I can only say that in Sunday's Washington paper the "Help Wanted" section was 29 pages in length and many of the positions of- fered were for unskilled people. An example of the extreme provisions of this conference report is that section on page 9 captioned "Forcibly Resisting the Commission or Its Representatives." Section 714 reads in part: Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 111 and 1114 of title 18, United States Code, Whoever in violation of the provisions of sectiOn 1114 of such title kills a person while engaged in or on account of the performance of his official functions under this Act shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life. Nothing is said about arrest, trial, or conviction. The word "kill" is not even qualified with the usual criminal expres- sion "maliciously" or "willfully." This section of the law may be a good demon- stration of the justice intended by the equal opportunity employment legisla- tion. The seriousness of such a poorly drawn bit of legislation is that the unqualified word "kill" without any indication of in- tent could even extend to an EEOC em- ployee killed in an automobile accident. If any EEOC people are killed, is the in- volved party to be imprisoned without even the equal opportunity for a hearing or trial? I intend to cast my people's vote against this police state type legislation. Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous ques- tion on the conference report. The previous question was ordered. The SPEAKER. The question is on the conference report. The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes ap- peared to have it. Mr. SCHMITZ. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present. The Sergeant at Arms will notify ab- sent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. The question was taken; and there were?yeas 303, nays 110, not voting 18, as follows: [Roll No. 671 YEAS-303 Abourezk Andrews Begich Abzug Annunzio Belcher Adams Arends Bell A ddabbo Ashley Bergland Alexander Aspin Biaggi Anderson, Aspinall Biester Calif. Badillo Bingham Anderson, Ill. Barrett Blanton March 8, 1972 Blatnik Hamilton Boggs Hanley Boland Hanna Bolling Hansen, Idaho Bradernas Hansen, Wash. Brasco Harrington Brooks Harsha Broomfield Harvey Brotzman Hastings Brown, Mich. Hathaway Brown, Ohio Hawkins Buchanan Hays Burke, Mass, Hechler, W. Va. Burlison, Mo. Heckler, Mass. Burton Heinz Byrne, Pa. Helstoski Byrnes, Wis. Hicks, Mass. Caffery Hicks, Wash. Carey, N.Y. Hillis Carney Hogan Carter Holifield Cederberg Horton Celler Hosmer Chamberlain Howard Chisholm Hungate Clark Hunt Clausen, Jacobs Don H. Johnson, Calif. Clay Johnson, Pa. Cleveland Jones, Ala. Collins, Ill. Karth Conable Kastenmeier Conte Kazen Conyers Keating Gorman Kee Cotter Keith Coughlin Kemp Culver Kluczynski Daniels, N.J. Koch Danielson Kyl Davis, S.C. Kyros de la Garza Latta Delaney Leggett Dellenback Lent Dellums Link Denholm Lloyd Dent Long, Md. Diggs Lujan Dingell McClory Donohue McCloskey Dow McClure Drinan McCormack Dulski McCulloch du Pont McDade Dwyer McDonald, Eckhardt Mich. Edmondson McEwen Edwards, Calif. McFall Eilberg McKay Erlenborn McKevitt McKinney Madden Mailliard Mallary Martin Mathias, Calif. Matsunaga 1Vlazzoli Meeds Esch Eshleman Evans, Colo. Evins, Tenn. Fascell Findley Fish Flood Foley Ford, Gerald R. Melcher Ford, Metcalfe William D. Miller, Ohio Forsythe Mills, Ark. Fraser Minish Frelinghuysen Mink Frenzel Minshall Fulton Mitchell Fuqua Mollohan Galifianakis Monagan Gallagher Moorhead Garmatz Morgan Giaimo Morse Gibbons Mosher Goldwater , Moss Gonzalez Myers Goodling Hatcher Grasso Nedzi Gray Nelsen Green, Oreg. Nix Green, Pa. Obey Griffiths O'Hara Grover O'Konski Gubser O'Neill Gude Patten Halpern Pelly Abbitt Abernethy Archer Ashbrook Baker Bennett NAYS-110 Betts Ilevill Blackburn Bow Bray Brinkley 'Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Pepper Perkins Pettis Peyser Pickle Pike Pirnie Poage Podell Preyer, N.C. Price, /IL Pucinski Purcell Quie Railsback Rangel Rees Reid Reuss Rhodes Robison, N.Y. Rodino Roe Roncalio Rooney, N.Y. Rooney, Pa. Rosenthal Rostenkowski Roush Roy Roybal Ruppe Ryan St Germain Sandman Sarbanes Saylor Scheuer Schneebeli Schwengel Sebellus Seiberling Shriver Sisk Skuhitz Slack Smith, Iowa Smith, N.Y. Springer Staggers Stanton, James V. Steed Steele Steiger, Wis. Stokes Stratton Sullivan Symington Talcott Teague, Calif. Terry Thompson, N.J. Thomson, Wis. Thone Tiernan Udall Ullman Van Deerlin Vander Jagt Vanik Veysey Vigorito Waldie Ware Whalen Whalley Widnall Wiggins Williams Wilson, Charles H. Winn Wolff Wright Wyatt Wydler Wylie Wyman Yates Yatron Young, Tex. Zablocki Zion Zwach Broyhill, N.C. Broyhill, Va. Burke, Fla. Burleson, Tex. Byron Cabell Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 8, 19-72 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE H 1871 Camp Casey, Tex. Chappell Clancy Clawson, Del Collins, Tex. Colmer Crane Curlin Daniel, Va. Davis, Ga. Davis, Wis. Dennis Derwinski Devine Dickinson Dorn Dowdy Downing Duncan Edwards, Ala. Fisher Flowers Flynt ? Fountain Frey Gettys Griffin Gross Hagan Haley Hall Hammer- schmidt Hebert Henderson Hutchinson Ichord Jarman Jonas Jones, N.C. Jones, Tenn, King Kuykendall Landgrebe Landrum Lennon Long, La. McCollister McMillan Mahon Mann Mathis, Ga. Mayne Michel Mills, Md. Mizell Montgomery Nichols Passman Patman Poll Price, Tex. Quillen Randall Rarick Roberts Robinson, Va. Rogers Rousselot Runnels Ruth Satterfield Scherle Schmitz Scott Shoup Sikes Smith, Calif. Snyder Spence Steiger, Ariz. Stephens Stuckey Taylor Teague, Tex. Thompson, Ga. Waggonner Wampler Whitehurst Whitten Wilson, Bob Young, Fla. NOT VOTING-18 Anderson, Macdonald, Tenn. Mass. Baring Mikva Collier Miller, Calif. Edwards, La. Murphy, Ill. Gaydos Murphy, N.Y. Hull Powell Pryor, Ark. Riegle Shipley Stanton, J. William Stubblefield White So the conference report was agreed to. The Clerk announced the following pairs: Mr. Mikva, with Mr. Collier. Mr. Anderson of Tennessee with Mr. Powell. Mr. Shipley with Mr. Riegle. Mr. - Stubblefield with Mr. J. William Stanton. Mr. White with Mr. Baring. Mr. Macdonald of Massachusetts with Mr. Hull. Mr. Murphy of New York with Mr. Miller of California. Mr. Murphy of Illinois with Mr. Gaydos. Messrs. BRAY and TEAGUE of Texas changed their votes from "yea" to "nay." The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ? AU IZING CLERK OF THE OUSE TO MAKE CORRECTION IN THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 1746, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OP- PORTUNITIES ACT Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 554) and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the concurrent reso- lution as follows: H. CON. Rs. 554 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Clerk of the House of Representatives, in the enroll- ment of the bill (H.R. 1746) to further pro- mote equal employment opportunities for American workers, is authorized and directed to make the following change: In paragraph (a) of Section 4, strike out "Sec. 705." and insert in lieu thereof "Sec. 706." , Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, reserving the \ right to object, Just what is proposed to \be accomplished by this resolution? Mr. PERKINS. If the gentleman will ield, there was a technical error in 'umbering a section of the act. It was made by the staff, and was not detected in the report until after the report had been printed. Mr. GROSS. It is then purely a tech- nical amendment to the bill? Mr. PERKINS. That is correct. Mr. GROSS. It does not change the substantive language of the bill? Mr. PERKINS. That is correct. It is just a renumbering. Mr. GROSS. Simply a renumbering of the sections? Mr. PERKINS. That is correct. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ken- tucky? There was no objection. The concurrent resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. GENERAL LEAVE Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members desiring to do so may have 5 legislative days within which to extend and re- vise their remarks on the conference report on the EEOC. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ken- tucky? There was no objection. CORRECTION OF VOTE Mr. GUDE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 66, today, I am recorded as not vot- ing. I was present and voted "nay." I ask unanimous consent that the RECORD be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Maryland? There was no objection. TRANSPO 72 AUTHORIZATION Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, by direc- tion of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 879 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- lows: H. Has. 879 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House pn the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 11624) to amend the Military Construction Authori- zation Act, 1970, to authorize additional funds for the conduct of an international aeronautical exposition. After general debate, which shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not to exceed one hour, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairrnan and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services, the bill shall be read for amendment under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit. After the passage of H.R. 11624, it shall be in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill S. 3244 and to consider the said Senate bill in the House. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. PEPPER) IS recognized for 1 hour. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the gentlman from Califor- nia (Mr. SMITH) pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 879 provides an open rule with 1 hour of gen- eral debate for consideration of HR. 11624 authorizing adidtional funds for Transpo '72. After passage of the bill, it shall be in order to take S. 3244 from the Speaker's table and consider the same in the House. The purpose of H.R. 11624 is to au- thorize an additional $2 million for the conduct of an international transporta- tion exposition, Transpo 72. In the 1971 Military Construction Au- thorization Act$3 million was author- ized for the purpose of Transpo 72 based on preliminary cost estimates. Since then costs have increased for site prep- aration, utilities installation, sanitary, restaurant, and communications facili- ties, and vehicle parking and control. Need for the additional $2 million is based on recent engineering studies. The exposition is planned to take place at Dulles Airport in May of this year, Mr. Speaker, and I urge the adoption of the rule in order to expedite passage of the legislation. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the gen- tleman yield? Mr. PEPPER. I yield to the distin- guished gentleman from Iowa. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Is not this the same bill which was defeated in the House under suspension of the rules last December? Mr. PEPPER. I am advised that the bill was not authorized under suspen- sion of the rules recently, and, there- fore, the matter came to the Committee on Rules. I understand that there was a vote on the floor. Mr. GROSS. Yes; that was last De- cember 6. Mr. PEPPER. I believe it was. Mr. GROSS. Let me ask the gentle- man, why not let nature take its course, instead of providing that the Senate bill can be substituted to just let nature take its course and see what happens? Why, should the Committee on Rules be called upon to mandate the Senate bill to be substituted for this little monstrosity?or for this big monsrosity? Mr. PEPPER. The gentleman will al- low me to yield to the able chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. HEBERT) to answer this question. Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I will be very happy to answer that question. It was a case of expediting the bill. The Senate was so informed, if they passed the bill, we would take action on this side. It was a preferential procedure? instead of us passing the bill on this side and to let it rest on the Senate side and where we may have run into a delay, that we did not want to run into. This is purely a matter of judicious operation Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1872 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE March 8, 1972 such as the gentleman from Iowa would be proud to be a part of. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman from Florida yield? Mr. PEPPER. I yield to the gentleman. Mr. GROSS. This confirms what I thought was a little evasive action to prevent nature from taking its course. In other words, to prevent the normal legis- lative procedure to take place, and to' get this rolled through because time is running out on this bobtailed thing that you propose to put on now at Dulles, I guess. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I yield fur- ther to the gentleman from Louisiana. Mr. HEBERT. The gentleman from Louisiana, having had the experience of many years observing the gentleman from Iowa in his wisdom and his re- sourcefulness, decided to follow that course, and I hope I have set a good example and that the pupil will at least equal the master in this respect. Mr. GROSS. I wish the gentleman had directed those compliments to the taxpayers of this country who have to put up the money for this kind of a deal?but I accept them on behalf of the taxpayers. Mr. HEBERT. Through the gentle- man from Iowa who is known as the tax- payers' defender, I extend it to the tax- payers as well. Mr. SMITH of California. Mr. Speak- er, I yield myself such time as I may con- sume. (Mr. SMITH of California asked and was given permission to revise and ex- tend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of California. Mr. Speak- er, I concur in the statement made by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. PEPPER) in explanation of the rule. May I simply add that I know of no objection from the Department or the Office of Management and Budget or from the executive branch. I believe this amount of money has already been ap- propriated in an appropriation bill so we are just going to catch up with this authorization so that we can now spend it. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the resolution, House Resolution 879. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered. The resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid an the table. IN" THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 11624) to amend the Military Construction Authorization Act of 1970, to authorize additional funds for the conduct of an international aero- nautical exposition. The motion was agreed to. Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the con- sideration of the bill H.R. 11624, with Mr. ABBITT in the Chair. The Clerk read the title of the bill. By unanimous consent, the first read- ing of the bill was dispensed with. The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Mama) will be recognized for 30 minutes, and the gentleman from California (Mr. GlYBSER) will be recognized for 30 min- utes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. HEBERT) . Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Chairman, the leg- islation before the House, H.R. 11624, which amends the Military Construc- tion Authorization Act of 1970, is for the purpose of authorizing additional funds for the conduct of an international aero- nautical exposition. The exposition, now referred to as Transpo 72, is scheduled to be con- ducted at Dulles International Airport beginning next May 27. The President assigned responsibility for the conduct of the exposition to the Secretary of Transportation who determined that the exposition will include all forms of trans- portation and not be strictly an aeronau- tical exposition. However, aeronautics will play a dominant role in the exposi- tion, and this includes military avia- tion. The planners of the exposition, under Secretary Volpe, anticipate that the ex- position will make a considerable con- tribution to the domestic economy through stimulating the sale of new transportation concepts and systems within our own economy as well as abroad. Also, they are hopeful that the exposition will help make governments at various levels, industry, and the pub- lic aware of a number of solutions of- fered by technology to our many trans- portation problems. Therefore, our com- mittee believes that the additional funds to be expended pursuant to the addi- tional authorization contained in this bill would be a most productive invest- ment. Our committee brought this legisla- tion to the floor on December 6, 1971 un- der suspension of the rules. The vote was 33 votes short of having a two-thirds majority. I am convinced that the vote was due to a misunderstanding in con- nection with the$2 million increase in authorization requested by the Depart- ment of Transportation. A number of Members have advised me they under- stood from remarks on the floor during the debate on this bill, under suspension of the rules, that the increase in author- ization was due to a cost overrun. This is where the misunderstanding origi- nated. The current authorization level of $3 million was based on preliminary cost estimates made by the Department of Transportation last year. Based upon final engineering studies, they have ar- rived at a more precise cost estimate and are recommending that the present au- thorization be increased to a total of$5 million. The primary reasons for the increase are: The inability to accurately estimate costs until the master plan and engi- neering design were completed, and in- flation, which has accelerated at a rate In excess of that anticipated in the pub- lished cost estimating handbooks used in developing the original cost estimates for Transpo 72. -The Appropriations Committee, in Public Law 92-184, has already appro- priated the $2 million subject to author- izing legislation. The Senate, on March 1, 1972, passed S. 3244, a bill identical to H.R. 11624, the bill before you. So, therefore, it is the recommendation of the Committee on Armed Services that the House pass H.R. 11624, at which time, in accordance with the rule, we will ask that the language in the Senate bill, which as I have said is identical to H.R. 11624, be substituted, thereby making it possible to immediately send the bill to the White House for Presidential signa- ture. In that way the funds already ap- propriated can immediately be put to work, and our Nation can go forward with production of Transpo 72. (Mr. HEBERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) (Mr. ARENDS^ (at the request of Mr. GUBSER) was granted permission to ex- tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD.) Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of HR. 11624. The purpose of this bill is to increase from$3 million to $5 million the funds authorized for appropriation under the fiscal year 1970 Military Construction Authorization Act, as amended, for the conduct of an international aeronautical exposition. The exposition, referred to as Transpo 72, is scheduled to be con- ducted at Dulles International Airport on May 27, 1972, through June 4, 1972. The responsibility for the conduct of the ex- position has been delegated to the De- partment of Transportation. An exposition of this magnitude does not happen overnight. The original concept?that of an air show?came into being in the mid-1960's when Federal Aviation Administration personnel be- gan studies of the feasibility of conduct- ing an international aeronautical expo- sition in the United States. The late chairman of our committee, L. Mendel Rivers, took an interest in the idea and promoted the concept in Con- gress. With the backing of the execu- tive branch and through the efforts of Chairman Rivers, Congress authorized the initial exposition. As planning for the exposition began, it became evident that a simple air show was too limited a concept to accurately reflect the stature of the United States as an innovative and responsible world leader in technology and products. The exposition format was broadened to in- clude all modes of transportation and the name was changed to the United States International Transportation Exposition. Secretary of Transportation John A. Volpe, to whom President Nixon had en- trusted the responsibility for production and management of the exposition, coined the acronym "Transpo 72" to embrace the exposition's dedication to the total transportation spectrum. Com- mittees of distinguished representatives -of industry and government were formed to assist the Secretary in creating an ex- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 S 3460 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The quo tion is on agreeing to the resolution. The resolution was considered nd agreed to, as follows: Resolved. That the Committee on the Judi- ciary is authorized to expend from the con- tingent fund of the Senate, during the Ninety-second Congress,$10,000 in addition to the amount, and for the same purposes, specified in section 134(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. Approved Fo ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES BY THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERN- MENT OPERATIONS The Senate proceeded to the consider- ation of the resolution (S. Res. 257) au- thorizing additional expenditures by the Committee on Government Operations for routine purposes. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, this is $40,000 for the routine funds for the operation of the committee. That is in, addition to the amounts provided under the Legislative Reorganization Act. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on agreeing to the resolution. The resolution (S. Res. 257) was agreed to, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Govern- ment Operations is authorized to expend from the contingent fund of the Senate, during the Ninety-second Congress,$40,000 In addition to the amount, and for the same purposes, specified in section 134(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. PUBLIC DEBT LIMITATION The PRESIDING OFFICER. The call of the calendar has been completed. The Chair now lays before the Senate the unfinished business, which will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (H.R. 12910) to provide for a tempo- rary increase in the public debt limit. MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE? ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED A message from the House of Repre- sentatives, by Mr. Berry, one of its read- ing clerks, announced that the Speaker had affixed his signature to the enrolled bill (H.R. 12067) making appropriations for foreign assistance and related pro- grams for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1972, and for other purposes. The PRESIDENT pro tempore subse- quently signed the enrolled bill. QUORUM CALL Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I sug- gest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk Proceeded to call the roll. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OrteiCER (Mr. MANSFIELD). Without objection, it is so ordered. 01/08/28 : ClArRDP7360_0296R000400100021-4 ESSIONAL RECORD ?NENAAE March 6, 19 72 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTU- NITY ACT OF 1972?CONFERENCE REPORT Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I sub- mit a report of the committee of confer- ence on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 1746) to further pro- mote equal employment opportunities for American workers. I ask unanimous con- sent for the present consideration of the report. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. MANSFIELD). Is there objection to the proceeded to consider the report. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider ther eport. (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the CONGRES- SIONAL RECORD of March 2, 1972, at pp. H1694-H1697.) . Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a section-by- section analysis, together with a state- ment, be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: Mr. President, I anticipate the Senate's overwhelming acceptance of the Conference Report on H.R. 1746, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. Today's action will represent a vital step toward the realization of equal employment opportunities for millions of Americans. The conferees were all mindful of the im- portance of this measure; and while we did not have a lengthy conference, each differ- ence between the Senate and the House bills was carefully considered. In some instances the Senate version prevailed, in others, we receded to the House. In the major provisions dealing with enforcement, the conferees adopted amendments that included provi- sions from both bills. I am delighted that the report contains all of the key provisions of the Senate bill ex- tending coverage. This will bring many mil- lions of Americans under the protection of title VII?State and local government em- ployees, employees of private and public ed- ucational institutions as well as employees in smaller businesses and unions than those covered by the existing law. Furthermore, I think that the provision giving the EEOC the power to go to court is going to get the job done. This process may be somewhat slower and more cumbersome than the cease and desist procedure we origi- nally sought. But, in the final analysis, I most firmly believe that we will get the de- sired enforcement. Mr. President, this bill had a long journey through the 'Senate, but there were some historic "firsts" during the consideration of the measure. It was the first time a Civil Rights bill was reported unanimously out of the Labor and Public Welfare Committee, and after five weeks of extended debate involving 38 roll call votes, fifty-three Senators signed the final successful cloture petition?a record for a Civil Rights bill?and 73 Senators voted in behalf of cloture?another Civil Rights record. Mr. President, the House will consider this report within the next few days, favorably I am. sure. I hope that upon completion of final Congressional action, the President will act as fast as humanly possible to sign the legislation and to seek the funding necessary to implement the enforcement procedure. I would like to mention that unfortu- nately the Senator from New York ( JAvrrs) had no notice that this matter wo aid come up today and is not able to be here for this vote. We did consult him when we learned of the leadership's plan to bring this conference report up today, and he urged us to proceed, even though he would miss the opportunity to cast his vote at this last stage of what has been a long, ardu ms struggle, in which he played a key role. Mr. President, I ask unanimous cons mt that an analysis of H.R. 1746 as reported from the conference, that the Senator from /'ew York (Mr. JAvrrs) and myself have prepa red to be included in the RECORD following my remarks. SECTION-By-SECTION ANALYSIS OP H.R. 146. THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY icr OF 1972 This analysis explains the major provisions of H.R. 1746, the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972, as agreed to by the Con- ference Committee of the House and Senate on February 29, 1972. The explanation re- flects the enforcement provisions of Title VII, as amended by the procedural and jurisdic- tional provisions of H.R. 1746, recommended by the Conference Committee. In any area where the new law does not address itself, or in any areas where a specific contrary intention is not indicated, it was assumed that the present case law as de- veloped by the courts would continue to govern the applicability and construction of Title VII. SECTION 2 This section amends certain definitions contained in section /01 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 701 (a) ?This subsection defines "person" as used in Title VII. Under the pro- visions of H.R. 1746, the term is now exL panded to include State and local govern- ments, governmental agencies, and political subdivisions. Section 701 (5)?This subsection defines the term "employer" as used in Title VII. This subsection would now include, within the meaning of the term "employer," all State and local governments, governmental agencies, and political subdivisions, and the District of Columbia departments or agen- cies (except those subject by statute to the procedures of the Federal competitive service as defined in 5 U.S.C. ? 2102, who along with all other Federal employees would now be covered by section 717 of the Act.) This subsection would extend coveraga of the term "employer," one year after enact- ment, to those employers with 15 or more employees. The present standard for deter- mining the number of employees of an em- ployer, i.e., "employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year," present- ly applicable to all employers of 25 or more employees would apply to the expanded coverage of employers of 15 or more em- ployees. Section 701(c) ?This subsection elimimites the present language that provides a par- tial exemption for agencies of the United States, States or the political subdivisions of States from the definition of "employrr ent agency" to reflect the provisions of seci ion 701(a) and (b) above. States agencies, pre- viously covered by reference to the United States Employment Service, continue to be covered as employment agencies under MIS section. Section 701(e) ?This subection is rev:sed to include labor organizations with 15 Or more members within the coverage of Title VII, one year after enactment. Section 701( f ) ?This subsection is in- tended to exclude from the definition of Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/2$? CJA-RDP73_500296R000400100021-4 March 6, 1972 CONGRESSIO.NAL 1aCURD ? SENATE S 3459 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on agreeing to the resolution, as amended. The resolution, as amended, was agreed to. ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE COM- M1.ri.111., ON APPROPRIATIONS The resolution (S. Res. 229) to provide additional funds for the Committee on Appropriations was considered and agreed to, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Appro- priations hereby is authorized to expend from the contingent fund of the Senate, dur- ing the Ninety-second Congress,$50,000, In addition to the amount and for the same purpose, specified in section 134(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act, approved August 2, 1946, and Senate Resolution 11, agreed to March 1, 1971. ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES BY THE COMMIrrtlE ON ARMED SERVICES The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution (S. Res. 252) authorizing additional expenditures by the Commit- tee on Armed Services for routine pur- poses which had been reported from the Committee on Rules and Administration with an amendment in line 3, after the word "Congress", strike out "second ses- sion,"; so as to make the resolution read: Resolved, That the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to expend from the contingent fund of the Senate, during the Ninety-second Congress, $25,000 In addition to the amount, and for the same purposes, specified In section 134(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I would like to say a few words in justification of Senate Resolution 252 which would pro- vide additional spending authority of$455,000 for the Committee on Armed Services for inquiries and investigations for the 12-month period beginning March 1, 1972. This $455,000 compares with$388,000 on a 12-month basis of the $420,000 re- quested and authorized for the 13-month period of January 1, 1971, to February 29, 1972. The$67,000 increase over the prior comparable 12-month period is due to: First, the possible addition of one pro- fessional to the Preparedness Subcom- mittee staff at about $25,000; Second,$25,000 more than that budg- eted last year for the increased use of consultants by the full committee; and Third, the remaining $17,000 primarily made up of estimated pay raises and in- creases in agency contributions. A total of 15 professional and clerical personnel was authorized for the staff conducting inquiries and investigations for the committee last year, and by the end of the year all 15 were employed. One additional staff member, for a total of 16, is requested this year, The use of these investigating funds goes far beyond*the meaning of this term. The principal use of these funds is to pro- vide the staff to support the legislative functions of the full committee. The plain fact is the number of staff personnel au- thorized under the Reorganization Act is not sufficient to properly fulfill the need for the indepth study and analysis re- quired for the legislative responsibilities of the comMittee. The Armed Services Committee; its Subcommittees on Research and Devel- opment, chaired by Senator McItrryaz; Tactical Air Power, chaired by Senator CANNON; Bomber Defense, which I chair; and Close Air Support, which Senator CANNON also chairs; and the committee staff are hard at work now holding hear- ings, evaluating and analyzing the fiscal year 1973 military procurement author- ization request. The Department of De- fense request not only includes over$22 billion in research and development and weapons procurement which require au- thorization, but also authorizes the ac- tive duty Imd selected reserve manpower levels for the armed services for the next fiscal year. Almost 60 percent of the total defense budget of $83.4 billion is for pay, allowances, and other closely related manpower costs. It is absolutely essen- tial that there be an adequate staff to properly analyze, study, and consider this request so RS to assist and enable the committee to reach an informed judg- ment on this and the multiplicity of other legislative matters referred to it. This staff also assists the committee with general invettigations and inquiries, and with specific studies with respect to other important legislation referred to the committee. Its inquiries and inves- tigations cover a wide range of military programs, policies, and problems. In addition to making detailed studies, examinations, and analyses of research and development and military hardware procurement requests, the staff also works on general legislation. An example is the Selective Service Act?a highly complex bill passed last year, The staff has also gone extensively into military manpower levels, including the require- ments for NATO, and military readiness and preparedness in general. The full committee commenced manpower, hear- ings early last month. I believe I should stress the scope and complexity of the annual military au- thorization bill. It includes authorization for research and development, for mill- taiy hardware procurement, and for the manpower levels of the various services. Fur example, for fiscal year 1971 the re- quest, exclusive of military construction, was approximately$20.6 billion and, as a result of the work done by the addi- tional men employed, the hearings before the. full committee and its subcommittees, and the fine work of the committee's regular staff, the committee recom- mended a reduction of $1.4 billion. In fiscal year 1972, the authorization request was about$22.2 billion and the bill as reported to the Senate recom- mended a reduction of approximately $1.1 billion. The fiscal year 1973 bill again requests about$22.2 billion, ex- clusive of military construction for Safe- guard, and is now in the process of being analyzed and studied. I think I should point out also, Mr. President, that the authorization re- quests presented to our committee in- volve amounts substantially more than the aggregate of the authorizations re- quested for all of the other departments of the Government. This refers to those authorizations which are required be- fore appropriations can be made. This means that our relatively small staff is responsible for a greater amount of au- thorization than the total of the author- ization bills for all, other governmental departments combined. For example, the total amount re- quested for authorization for research and development, military procurement, and military construction for fiscal year 1970, was $25.2 billion. All other author- izations for that year totaled only$12.7 billion. For fiscal year 1971, $22.4 billion was requested for research and development, military procurement, and military con- struction. For all other bills the amount was$11.9 billion. For fiscal year 1972, military author- ization requests totaled $24 billion; the aggregate authorization request for all other departments was$14.1 billion. As I have already mentioned, the fiscal year 1973 authorization request for re- search and development and hardware procurement alone totals about $22.2 bil- lion. This does not include the military construction authorization request. For all other departments the fiscal year 1973 authorization request is about$21 billion. I would close, Mr. President, by point- ing out that significant amounts of these funds have been unexpended and re- turned by the committee for each of the past 10 years. At the conclusion of the budget year just completed, approxi- mately $49,000 was returned. This con- sistent record of not spending all the money provided to us indicates the aus- terity and economy with which the ex- penditure of committee funds have been controlled. On the record which we have made, I think it should be agreed that we have been extremely frugal and economical in our operations and, in view of the com- plex subject matters with which we deal, the huge amounts involved and the resulting necessity for professional, trained, and expert personnel, the re- quest for$455,000 is justified. I urge the Senate to approve this request. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, this is the routine amount provided by the Leg- islative Reorganization Act of $25,000 for the' Armed Services Committee. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on agreeing to the committee amendment. The amendment was agreed to. The resolution, as amended, was agreed to. ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE COM- MITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY ' e Senate proceeded to consider the reso tion (S. Res. 255) to provide ad- ditio al funds for the Committee on the Judiciary for routine committee expendi- tures. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, this$10,00 is in addition to the amount pro- vided der the Legislative Reorganiza- tion Ac for the regular committee func- tions. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved Fcceigillmists3981,4918i2ftteallipP7AN9i2ppRO00400100021-4 March 6, 1972 "Employee" as used in Title VII those per- sons elected to public office in any State or political subdivision. The exemption ex- tends to persons chosen by such officials to be on their personal staffs, appointees of such officials to be on their personal staff, appointees of such officials on the highest policymaking levels such as cabinet mem- bers or other immediate advisors of such elected officials with respect to the exercise of the Constitutional or legal powers of the office held by such elected officer. The exemp- tion does not include civil service employees. This exemption is intended to be construed very narrowly and is in no way intended to estbalish an overall narrowing of the ex- panded coverage of State and local govern- mental employees as set forth in section 701(a) and (b) above. Section 701(j)?This subsection, which is new, defines "religion" to include all aspects of religious observance, practice and belief, so as to require employers to make reason- able accommodations for employees whose "religion" may include observances, prac- tices and beliefs such as sabbath observance, which differ from the employer's or poten- tial employer's requirements regarding standards, schedules, or other business-re- lated employment conditions. Failure to make such accommodation would be unlawful unless an employer can demonstrate that he cannot reasonably ac- commodate such beliefs, practices, or observ- ances without undue hardship on the con- duct of his business. The purpose of this subsection is to pro- vide the stautory basis for EEOC to formu- late guidelines on discrimination because of religion such as those challenged in Dewey v. Reynolds Metals Company, 429 F.2d 325 (6th Cir. 1970), Affirmed by an equally divided court, 402 U.S. 689 (1971). SECTION 3 This section amends the exemptions al- lowed in section 702 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 702?This section is amended to elminate the exemption for employees of ed- ucational institutions. Under the provisions of this section, all private and public edu- cational institutions would be covered un- der the provisions of Title VII. The special provision relating to religious educational Institutions in Section 703(e) (2) is not dis- turbed. The limited exemption from coverage in this section for religious corporations, as- sociations, educational institutions or soci- eties has been broadened to allow such en- tities to employ individuals of a particular religion in all their activities instead of the present limitation to religious activities. Such organizations remain subject to the provisions of Title VII with regard to race, color, sex or national origin. SECTION 4 This section establishes the enforcement powers and functions of the EEOC and the Attorney General to aid in the prevention of unlawful employment practices proscribed by Title VII of the Civil Rights -Act of 1961. H.R. 1746 retains the general scheme of the present law which enables the EEOC to proc- ess a charge of employment discrimination through the Investigation and conciliation stages. In addition, H.R. 1746 now authorizes the EEOC, in cases where the respondent is not a government, governmental agency or political subdivision to file a civil action against the respondent in an appropriate Fed- eral District Court, if it has been unable to eliminate an alleged unlaivful employment practice by informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion. The Attorney General is authorized to file civil actions against respondents that are governments, governmental agencies or political subdivi- sions if the EEOC is unable to achieve a suc- cessful conciliation. Accordingly, section 4 of H.R. 1746, amends section 706(a) through (g) of the present act to accomplish the stated national purpose of achieving equal employment opportunity as follows: Section 706 (a)?This subsection empowers the Commission to prevent persons from en- gaging in unlawful employment practices un der sections 703 and 704 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The unlawful em- ployment practices encompassed by sections 703 and 704, which were enumerated in 1964 in the original Act, and as defined and ex- panded by the courts remain in effect. Section 706 (b) ?This subsection sets out the procedures to be followed when a charge a an unlawful employment practice is filed with the Commission. Under present law, a charge may be filed by a person aggrieved under oath or by a member of the Commission. As amended, this subsection now also permits a charge to be 11led by or on behalf of a person aggrieved or by a member of the Commission. Among other things, this provision would enable aggrieved persons to have charges processed under circumstances where they are un- willing to come forward publicly for fear of economic or physical reprisals. Charges (whether by or on behalf of an aggrieved person or a member of the Com- mission) must be in writing and under oath OT affirmation and in such form as the Com- mission requires. The Commission is to serve a notice of the charge on the respondent within ten days. It is not intended, however, that failure to give notice of the charge to the respondent within ten days would prejudice the rights of the aggrieved party. The Commission would be expected to investigate the charge as quickly as possible and to make its de- termination on whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true. If It finds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, it shall dis- miss the charge and notify the complainant and the respondent of its decision. If the Commission finds reasonable cause, it will attempt to conciliate the case. Noth- ing said or done during the Commission's informal endeavors may be made public or used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding without the written consent of the parties covered. The Commission would be required to make its determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, "so far as prac- ticable," within 120 days from the filing of the charge or from the date upon which the Commission is authorized to act on the charge under section 706(e) or (d). The Commission, where appropriate, would be re- quired in making its determination of rea- sonable cause to accord substantial weight to final findings and orders made by State or local authorities under Satte and local laws. This subsection and section 9(a) - (d) of the bill clarifies existing law to carry out the intent of the present statute to provide full coverage for joint labor-management committees controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on- the-job training programs as reflected in Rios v. Enterprise Assn., Steamfitters Local' No. 638, 326 F. Supp. 198 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). Sections 706(c) and (d)?These subsec- tions, dealing with deferral to appropriate State and local equal employment oppor- tunity agencies, are identical to sections 706 (b) and (c) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. No change in these provisions was deemed necessary in view of the recent Supreme Court decision of Love v. Pullman Co., U.S. , 92 S. Ct. 616 (1972) which ap- proved the present EEOC deferral procedures as fully in compliance with the intent of the Act. That case held that the EEOC may receive and defer a charge to a State agency on behalf of a complainant and begin to process the charge in the EEOC upon lapse S 3461 of the 60-day deferral period, even though the language provides that no charge can be flied under section 706(a) by the person aggrieved before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced un- der the State or local law. Similarly, the re- cent circuit court decision in Vigil -V. AT&T, F. M , 4 FEP cases 345 (10th Cir. 1972), which provided that in order to pro- tect the aggrieved person's right to file with the EEOC within the time periods specified in section 706(c) and (d), a charge filed with a State or local agency may also be filed with the EEOC during the 60-day deferral - period, is within the intent of this Act. Section 706(e)?This subsection sets forth the time limitations for filing charges with the Commission. Under the present law, charges must be filed within 90 days after an alleged unlaw- ful employment practice has occurred. In cases where the Commission defers to a State or local agency under the provisions of sec- tion 706(c) or (d), the charge must be filed within 30 days after the person aggrieved receives notice that the State or local agency has terminated its proceedings, or within 210 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred, whichever is earlier. This subsection as amended provides that charges be filed within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice. Court deci- sions under the present law have shown an inclination to interpret this time limitation so as to give the aggrieved person the maxi- mum benefit of the law; it is not intended that such court decisions should be in any way circumscribed by the extension of the time limitations in this subsection. Existing case law which has determined that certain types of violations are continuing in nature. thereby measuring the running of the re- quired time period from the last occurrence of the discrimination and not from the first occurrence is continued, and other interpre- tations of the courts maximizing the cover- age of the law are not affected. It is intended by expanding the time period for filing charges in this subsection that aggrieved in- dividuals, who frequently are untrained lay- man and who are not always aware of the discrimination which is practiced against them, should be given a greater opportunity to prepare their charges and file their com- plaints and that existent but undiscovered acts of discrimination should not escape the effect of the law through a procedural over- sight, Moreover, wide latitude should be given individuals in such cases to avoid any preju- dice to their rights as a result of government inadvertence, delay or error. The time period for filing a charge where deferral is required to a State or local anti- discrimination agency has been extended to 300 days after the alleged unlawful employ- ment practice occurred or to 30 days after the State or local agency has terminated pro- ceedings under the State or local law, which- ever is earlier. This subsection also restates the provision of Section 706(b) requiring a notice of the charge to the respondent within ten days after its having been filed. Section 706(f)?This subsection, which is new, sets forth the enforcement procedures which may be followed in those eases where the Commission has been unable to achieve voluntary compliance with the provisions of the Act. Section 706(f) (1) ?Under this subsection, if the respondent is not a government, gov- ernmental agency, or political subdivision and if the Commission is unable to secure a conciliation agreement that is acceptable to the Commission within 30 days from the filing of the charge or within 30 days after expiration of any period of reference under subsection (c) or (d) it may thereafter bring a civil action against the respondent in an appropriate district court. In cases involving a government, governmental agency, or polit- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 :_gAABS,73ERIR6A0004001000212ifarch 6, 7o7 2 S 3462 CONGRESSIONAL RU KD ieal subdivision, the Commission will not bring the case before a Federal District Court. After the Commission has had an opportunity to complete its investigation, and to attempt conciliation, the Commission shall then refer the case to the Attorney General who may bring the case to court. The aggrieved party is permitted to inter- vene in any case brought by the Commission or the Attorney General under this sub- section. With respect to cases arising under this subsection, if the Commission: (a) has dis- missed the charge, or (b) 180 days have elapsed from the filing of the charge with- out the Commission, or the Attorney Gen- eral, as the case may be, having filed a com- plaint under section 706(f), or without the Commission having entered into a con- ciliation agreement to which the person aggrieved is a party (i.e. a signatory) the person aggrieved may bring an action in an appropriate district court within 90 days after receiving notification. The retention of the private right of action, as amended, is intended to make clear that an individual aggrieved by a violation of Title VII should not be forced to abandon the claim merely because of a decision by the Commission or the Attorney General as the case may be. that there are insufficient grounds for the Government to file a complaint. Moreover, it is designed to make sure that the person aggrieved does not have to endure lengthy delays if the Commission or Attorney Gen- eral does not act with due diligence and speed. Accordingly, the provisions described above allow the person aggrieved to elect to pursue his or her own remedy under this title in the courts where there is agency inaction. dalliance or dismissal of the charge, or un- satisfactory resolution. It is hoped that recourse to the private lawsuit will be the exception and not the rule, and that the vast majority of com- plaints will be handled through the offices of the EEOC or the Attorney General, as ap- propriate. However, as the individual's rights to redress are paramount under the pro- visions of Title VII it is necessary that all avenues be left open for quick and effec- tive relief. In any civil action brought by an ag- grieved person, or in the case of a charge filed by a member of the Commission, by any person Whom the charge alleges was ag- grieved, the court may upon timely appli- cation of the complainant, appoint an at- torney and authorize the commencement of the action without the payment of fees, costs, or security in such circumstances as it deems just. The Commission, or the Al torney General in case involving a govern- mental entity, upon timely application and subject to the court's discretion, may inter- vene in such a private action if it is certified that the private action is of general public importance. In addition, the court is giveie discretion to stay proceedings for not more than 60 days pending the termination of State or local proceedings or efforts by tile Commission to obtain voluntary compliance. In establishing the enforcement provision: under this subsection and subsection 706(1i generally, it is not intended that any of the provisions contained therein shall affect the present use of class action lawsuits under Title VII in conjunction with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The courts have been particularly cognizant of the fest that claims under Title VII involve the via- dication of a major public interest, and that any action under the Act involves consider- ations beyond those raised by the individual claimant. As a consequence, the leading cases in this area to date have recognized that many Title VII claims are necessaril class action complaints and that, accord- ingly, it is not necessary that each individual entitled to relief be named in the original charge or in the claim for relief. A provision limiting class actions was contained in the House bill and specifically rejected by the Conference Committee. Section 706(j) (2)?This subsection au- thorizes the Commission or the Attorney General, in a case involving a government, a governmental agency or political subdivi- sion, based upon a preliminary investigation of a charge filed, to bring an action for ap- propriate temporary or preliminary relief, pending the final disposition of the charge. Such actions are to be assigned for hearing at the earliest possible date and expedited in every way. The provisions of Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure shall apply to actions brought under this subsection. The importance of preliminary relief in actions involving violations of Title VII is central to ensuring that persons aggrieved under this title are adequately protected and that the provisions of this Act are being fol- lowed. Where violations become apparent and prompt judicial action is necessary to insure these provisions, the Commission or the Attorney General, as the case may be, should not hesitate to invoke the provisions of this subsection. Section 706(j) (3)?This subsection, which is similar to the present section 706(f) of the Act, grants the district courts jurisdic- tion over actions brought by the EEOC, the Attorney General or aggrieved persons under this title and provides the venue require- ments. Such jurisdiction includes the power to grant such temporary or preliminary re- lief as the court deems just and proper. Section 706(j) (4) and (5)?Under these paragraphs, the chief judge is required to designate a district judge to hear the case. If no judge is available, then the chief judge of the circuit assigns the judge. Cases are to be heard at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way. If the judge has not scheduled the case for trial within 120 days after issue has been joined he may appoint a master to hear the case under Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The pur- pose of this provision is to relax the very strongest requirements of Rule 53 which preclude appointment of a master except in extremely unusual cases. Section 706(g)?This subsection is similar to the present section 706(g) of the Act. It authorizes the court, upon a finding that the respondent has engaged in or is engaging in . an unlawful employment practice, to enjoin the respondent from such unlawful conduct and order such affirmative relief as may be appropriate including, but not limited to, reinstatement or hiring, with or without back pay, as will effectuate the policies of the Act. Backpay is limited to that which accrues from a date not more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Com- mission. Interim earnings or amounts earn- able with reasonable diligence by the ag- grieved person(s) would operate to reduce the backpay otherwise allowable. The provisions of this subsection are in- tended to give the courts wide discretion exercising their equitable powers to fash- ion the most complete relief possible. In dealing with the present section 706(g) the courts have stressed that the scope of relief under that section of the Act is intended to make the victims of unlawful discrimina- tion whole, and that the attainment of this objective rests not only upon the elimination of the particular unlawful employment prac- tice complained of, but also requires that persons aggrieved by the consequences and effects of the unlawful employment practice be, so far as possible, restored to a position where they would have been were it not for the unlawful discrimination. SECTION 5 ? This section amends section 707, concern- ing the Attorney General's "pattern or prac- tice" authority to provide for a transfer of the "pattern or practice" jurisdiction to the Commission two years after the enactment of the bill. The bill further provides the Corn- mission with concurrent jurisdiction in this area from the date of enactment until the transfer is complete. The transfer is subject to, change in accordance with a Presidential reorganization plan if not vetoed by Congress. The section would provide that currently pending proceedings would continue without abatement, that all court orders and decrees remain in effect, and that upon the transfer the Commission would be substituted as a party for the United States of America or the Attorney General as appropriate. Under the provisions of this section, the Commission's present powers to investigate charges of discrimination remain. In addi- tion, it now has jurisdiction to initiate court action to correct any pattern or practice violations. SECTION 6 This section amends section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, entitled "Investiga- tions, Inspections, Records, State Agencies." Section 709 (a) ?This subsection, which gives the Commission the right to examine and copy documents in connection with its investigation of a charge, would remain un- changed. Section 709(b) ?This subsection would au- thorize the Commission to cooperate with State and local fair employment practice agencies in order to carry out the purposes of the title, ,and to enter into agreements with such agencies under which the Commis- sion would refrain from processing certain types of charges or relieve persons from the record keeping requirements. This subsection would make two changes in the present statute. Under this subsection, the Commis- sion could, within the limitations of funds appropriated for the purpose, also engaged in and contribute to the cost of research and other projects undertaken by these State and local agencies and pay these agencies in ad- vance for services rendered to the Commis- sion. The subsection also deletes the refer- ence to private civil actions under section 706(e) of the present statute. Section 709 (c)?This subsection, like the present statute, would require employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor-management apprenticeship committees subject to the title to make and keep certain records and to make reports to the Commission. Under the present statute, a party required to keep records could seek an exemption from these requirements on the ground of undue hardship either by ap- plying to the Commission or bringing a civil action in the district court. This subsection would require the party seeking the exemp- tion first to make an application to the Com- mission and only if the Commission denies the request could the party bring an action in the district court. This subsection would also authorize the Commission to apply for a court order compelling compliance with the record keeping and reporting obligations set forth in the subsection. Section 706(d)?This subsection would eliminate the present exemption from record keeping requirements for those employers in States and political subdivisions with equal employment opportunity laws or for employers subject to Federal executive order or agency record keeping requirements. Under this subsection, the Commiftion would consult with interested State and other Fed- eral agencies in order to coordinate the Fed- eral record keeping requirement under sec- tion 709(c) with those adopted by such agencies. The subsection further provides that the Commission furnish to such agencies information pertaining to State and local fair employment agencies, on condi- tion that the information would not be made public prior to the institution of State or local proceedings. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 ma a ft gmigf m-NE73EROliM00400100021-4 March 6, 197PProved For S 3463 SECTION 7 This section amends section 710 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by deleting the pre- sent section 710 and substituting therefor and to the extent appropriate the provisions of section 11 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. ? 161). By making this sub- stitution, the Commission's present demand power with respect to witnesses and evidence is repealed, and the power to subpoena wit- nesses and evidence, and to allow any of its designated agents, agencies or members to issue such subpoenas, as necessary for the conduct of any investigation, and to take testimony under oath is substituted. SECTIONS 8 (a) AND (b) These subsections would amend sections 703(a) and 703(c) (2) of the present statute to make it clear that discrimination against applicants for employment and applicants for membership in labor organizations is an unlawful employment practice. This subsec- tion is merely declaratory of present laws as contained in the decisions in Phillips v. Martin-Marietta Corp., 400 U.S. 542 (1971) ; U.S. v. Sheet Metal Workers International Assn., Local 36, 416 F. 2d 123 (8th Cir. 1969); Asbestos Workers, Local 53 v. Vogler, 407 F. 2d 1047 (5th Cir. 1969). SECTIONS 5(c) (1) AND (2) These subsections would amend section 704(a) and (b) of the present statute to make clear that joint labor-management ap- prenticeship committees are covered by those provisions which relate to discriminatory ad- vertising and retaliation against individuals participating in Commission proceedings. SECTION s(d) This subsection would amend section 705 (a) of the present statute to permit a mem- ber of the Commission to serve until his suc- cessor is appointed but not for more than 60 days when Congress is in session unless the successor has been nominated and the nomination submitted to the Senate, or after the adjournment sine die of the session of the Senate in which such nomination was submitted. The rest of the subsection provides that the Chairman of the Commission on behalf of the Commission, would be responsible, ex- cept as provided in section 705(b), for the administrative operations of the Commission and for the appointment of such officers, agents, attorneys, hearing examiners, and other employees of the Commission, in ac- cordance with Federal law, as he deems nec- essary. SECTION 5(e) This subsection would provide a new sec- tion 705(b) of the Act which establishes a General Counsel appointed by the President, With the advice and consent of the Senate, for a four (4) year term. The responsibilities of the General Counsel would include, in addition to those the Commission may pre- scribe and as provided by law, the conduct of all litigation as provided in sections 706 and 707 of the Act. The concurrence of the General Counsel with the Chairman is re- quired, on the reapointment and supervision of regional attorneys. This subsection would also continue the General Counsel on the effective date of the Act in that position until a successor has been appointed and qualified. The Commission's attorneys may at the Commission's direction appear for and rep- resent the Commission in any case in court, except that the Attorney General shall CO/1.- duct all litigation to which the Commission Is a party to in the Supreme Court pursuant to this title. SECTION 8 (f ) This subsection would eliminate the pro- vision in present section 705(g) authorizing the Commission to request the Attorney General to intervene in private civil actions. Instead, this subsection permits the Corn- mission itself to intervene in such civil ac- tions as provided in section '706. Where the respondent is a government, governmental agency or political subdivision, the Attorney General should be authorized to seek inter- vention. SECTION a(g) This section amends section 714 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by making the provisions of sections 111 and 1114 of Title 18, United States Code, applicable to officers, agents and employees of the Com- mission in performance of their official duties. This section also specifically pro- hibits the imposition of the death penalty on any -person who might be convicted of killing an officer, agent or employee of the Commission while on his official duties. SECTION 9(a), (b), (c), AND (d) These subsections would raise the execu- tive level of the Chairman of the Commis- sion (from Level 4 to level 3) and the mem- bers of the Commission (from Level 5 to Level 4) and include the General Counsel (Level 5) in the executive pay scale, so as to place them in a position of parity with officials in comparable positions in agencies having substantially equivalent powers such as the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Power Commission. SECTION 10 Section 715?This section, which is new, establishes an Equal Employment Opportu- nity Coordinating Council composed of the Secretary of Labor, the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Attorney General, the Chairman of the United States Civil Service Commission and the Chairman of the United States Civil Rights Commission or their respective des- ignees. The Council will have the responsi- bility to coordinate the activities of all the various branches of government with respon- sibility for equal employment opportunity. The Council will submit an annual report to the President and Congress including a sum- mary of its activities and recommendations as to legislative or administrative changes which it considers desirable. SECTION 11 Section 717(a)?This subsection provides that all personnel actions of the U.S. Govern- ment affecting employees or applicants for employment shall be free from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Included within this coverage are ex- ecutive agencies, the United States Postal Service, the Postal Rate Commission, certain departments of the District of Columbia Government, the General Accounting Office, Government Printing Office and the Library of Congress. Section 717(b)?Under this subsection, the Civil Service Commission' is given the authority to enforce the provisions of sub- section (a), except with respect to Library of Congress employees. The Civil Service Commission would be authorized to grant ap- propriate remedies which may include, but are not limited to, back pay for aggrieved applicants or employees. Any remedy needed to fully recompense the employee for his loss, both financial and professional, is con- sidered appropriate under this subsection. The Civil Service Commission is also granted authority to issue rules and regulations nec- essary to carry out its responsibilities under this section. The Civil Service Commission shall also annually review national and re- gional equal employment opportunity plans and be resonpsible for review and evaluation of all agency equal employment opportunity programs, Agency and executive department heads and officers of the District of Colum- bia shall comply with such rules and regula- tions, submit an annual equal employment opportunity plan and notify any employee or applicant of any final action taken on any complaint of discrimination filed. Section 717(c) and (d)?The provisions of sections 706(f) through (k) , concerning pri- vate civil actions by aggrieved persons, are made applicable to aggrieved Federal em- ployees or applicants for employment. Such persons would be permitted to file a civil ac- tion within 30 days of notice of final action by an agency or by the Civil Service Commis- sion or an appeal from the agency's decision, or after 180 days from the filing of an initial charge with the agency, or the Civil Service Commission, Section 717(e)?This subsection provides that nothing in this Act relieves any Govern- ment agency or official of his or its existing equal employment opportunity obligations under the Constitution, other statutes, or under any Executive Order relating to equal employment opportunity in the Federal Gov- ernment. SECTION 12 This section allows the Chairman of the Commission to establish ten additional posi- tions at the GS-16, GS-17 and GS-18 levels, as needed to carry out the purposes of this Act. SECTION 13 A new Section 718 is added which provides that no government contract, or portion thereof, can be denied, withheld, termi- nated, or superseded by a government agency under Executive Order 11246 or any other order or law without according the respective employer a full hearing and adjudication pursuant to 5 U.S.C. ? 554 et. seq where such employer has an affirmative action program for the same facility which had been accepted by the Government within the previous twelve months. Such plan shall be deemed to be accepted by the Government if the appropriate compliance agency has accepted such plan and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance has not disapproved of such plan within 45 days. However, an employer who substantially deviates from any such pre- viously accepted plan is excluded from the protection afforded by this section. SECTION 14 This section provides that the amended provisions of Section 706 would apply to charges filed with the Commission prior to the effective date of this Act. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion Is on agreeing to the conference?re- port. All those in favor say "aye." Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OleriCER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask for the yeas and nays on the Pending conference report. The yeas and nays were ordered. ORDER FOR VOTE ON EEOC CONFERENCE REPORT 'AT 2 P.M. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent that the vote on the pending conference report take place today at 2 p.m. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BYRD of West dent, I suggest the The PRESIDIN will call the roll. es rum. 0 CER. I ?lerk Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 S 3464 Approved ForCINecaisuqs010610y8i.E8i59P7 0004001000271A-4 -zuarch, 6, 1972 The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: Calendar No. 649, H.R. 12910, a bin to pro- vide for a temporary increase in the public debt limit. The assistant legislative clerk pro- ceded to call the roll. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING Ory.LCER (Mr. COTTON) . Without objection, it is BO or- dered. RECESS TO 1:55 P.M. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 1:55 p.m. The PRESIDING OFFiCER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Thereupon, at 1:23 p.m. the Senate took a recess until 1:55 p.m.; whereupon the Senate reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. SPONG) . Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OrTICER (Mr. SPONG ) . Without objection, it is so or- dered. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTU- NITY ACT OF 1972?CONFERENCE REPORT The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now pro- ceed to vote on the conference report to HR. 1746. On this question the yeas and nays have been- ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. I an- nounce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. BAYH) , the Senator from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN) , the Senator from Georgia (Mr. GAMBRELL), the Senator from Alaska (Mr,. GRAVEL), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. HARRIS) , the Sena- tor from Indiana (Mr. HARTKE) , the Sen- ator from South Carolina (Mr. HoL- Lmcs) , the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY ) , the Senator from Washing- ton (Mr. JAcicsoN), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. JORDAN). the Sena- tor from Arkansas (Mr. MCCLELLAN) , the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Mc- GovErhq) , the Senator from New Hamp- shire (Mr. MCINTYRE) , the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE ) , the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. FELL), and the Sena- tor from California (Mr. TUNNEY ) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. RIBICOFF) is ab- sent because of illness in the family. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Indiana (Mr. BAYH ) , the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL) , the Senator from Indiana (Mr. HARTKE) , the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY) , the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PELL) , and the Sen- ator from Connecticut (Mr. RIBICOFF) would each vote "yea." On this vote the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. JORDAN) is paired with the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACK- SON). If present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina would vote "nay" and the Senator from Washington would vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE) , the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) , the Senator from New York (Mr. Jinars), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY) , the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) , the Senator from Texas (Mr. TowEa.) , and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. WEIMER) are necessarily absent. The Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMON) is absent because of death in his family. The Senator from South Dakota (Mr. MUNDT) is absent because of illness. The Senator from New Jersey (Mr. CASE) and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. MATHIAS) are detained on official business. If present and voting, the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. MATHIAS) would each vote "yea." On this vote, the Senator from Illi- nois (Mr. PERCY) , is paired with the Senator from Texas (Mr. TOWER). If present and voting, the Senator from Illinois would vote "yea," and the Sen- ator from Texas would vote "nay." The result was announced?yeas 62, nays 10, as follows: Aiken Allott Anderson Baker Beall Bennett Bible Boggs Brock Brooke Buckley Burdick Byrd, Va. Byrd, W. Va. Cannon Chiles Church Cook Cooper Cranston Curtis Allen Cotton Eastland Ervin Bayb. Bellmon Bentsen Case Dole Gambrell Gravel Harris Hartke Hatfield [No. 88 Leg.] YEAS-62 Dominick Eagleton Ellender Fong Fulbright Griffin Gurney Hansen Hart Hruska Hughes Inouye Jordan, Idaho Kennedy Long Magnuson Mansfield McGee Metcalf Miller Mondale NAYS-10 Fannin Goldwater Sparkman Stennis Montoya Moss Nelson Packwood Pastore Pearson Proxmire Randolph Roth Saxbe Schweiker Scott Smith Spong Stafford Stevens Stevenson Symington Williams Young Talmadge Thurmond NOT VOTING-28 Hollings Humphrey Jackson Javits Jordan, N.C. Mathias McClellan McGovern McIntyre Mundt Muskie Pell Percy Ribicoff Taft Tower Tunney Weicker So the conference report to was agreed to. 13LXC DEBT LIMITATION The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BaocK) . The Chair lays before the Sen- ate the unfinished business which will be stated. The Senate continued with the con- sideration of the bill. ? QUORUM CALL Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I sug- gest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ORDER FOR RECOGNITION OF SEN- ATOR PROXMIRE ON WEDNES- DAY, MARCH 8 Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent that on Wednesday, immediately following the recognition of the two leaders under the standing order, the distinguished Sena- tor from Wisconsin (Mr. PROXMIRE) be recognized for not to exceed 15 minutes The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT TO 11:30 AM. TOMORROW Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today. it stand in adjournment until 11:30 a.m. tomorrow. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ORDER FOR PERIOD FOR THE TRANSACTION OF ROUTINE MORNING BUSINESS AND FOR UN- FINISHED BUSINESS TO BE LAID BEFORE THE SENATE TOMOR - ROW Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Pres- ident, I ask unanimous consent that on tomorrow, immediately after the two leaders have been recognized under the standing order, there be a period for the transaction of routine morning busine(35 for not to exceed 30 minutes, with state- ments therein limited to 3 minutes, at the conclusion of which the Chair lay before the Senate the unfinished busi- ness. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. QUORUM CALL Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Pre.- ident, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING 01(101(31,1t. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. SPONG. Mr. President, I ask unan- imous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 II 1694 Approved For FitaNtseneleitfint :ftkepgyaBgaggg0004o010002114arch 2, 1972 ADJOURNMENT OVER TO MONDAY NEXT Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani- mous consent that when the House ad- journs today it adjourn to meet on Mon- day next. The SPEAKER. Without objection, it is so ordered. There was no objeotion. DISPENSING WITH CALENDAR WEDNESDAY BUSINESS ON WEDNESDAY NEAT Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani- mous consent that the business in order under the calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday of next week, March 8. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Louisiana? There was no objection. CORRECTION OF VOTE Mr. MONAGAN. Mr. Speaker, I am in- formed that on the last rollcall of today I am recorded as not voting. I was pres- ent in the Chamber and voted "yea." I ask unanimous consent that the RECORD be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Conneoticut? There was no objection. CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1746, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTU- NITY ACT OF 1972 Mr. PERKINS submitted the follow- ing conference report and statement on the bill (H.R. 1746) to further pro- mote equal employment opportunities for American workers: CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. No. 92-899) The committee of conference on the dis- agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (HR. 1746). An Act to further promote equal em- ployment opportunities for American work- ers, having met, after full and free confer- ence, have agreed to recommend and do rec- ommend to their respective Houses as fol- lows: That the House recede from its disagree- ment to the amendment of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate amendment insert the following: That this Act may be cited as the "Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972". SEC. 2. Section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1961 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e) is amended as follows: (1) In subsection (a) insert "govern- ments, governmental agencies, political sub- divisions," after the word "individuals". (2) Subsection (b) is amended to read as follows: '(b) The term 'employer' means a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calen- dar weeks in the current or preceding calen- dar year, and any agent of such a person, but such term does not include (1) the United States, a corporation wholly owned by the Government of the United States, an Indian tribe, or any department or agency of the District of Columbia subject by stat- ute to procedures of the competitive service (as defined in section 2102 of title 5 of the United States Code), or (2) a bona fide pri- vate membership club (other than a labor organization) which is exempt from taxation under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, except that during the first year after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, per- sons having fewer than twenty-five em- ployees (and their agents) shall not be con- sidered employers." (3) In subsection (c) beginning with the semicolon strike out through the word "as- sistance". (4) In subsection (e) strike out between "(A)" and "and such labor organization", and insert in lieu thereof "twenty-five or more during the first year after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972, or (B) fifteen or more thereafter,". (5) In subsection (f), insert before the period a comma and the following: "except that the term 'employee' shall not include any person elected to public office in any State or political subdivision of any State by the qualified voters thereof, or any person chosen by such officer to be on such officer's personal staff, or an appointee on the policy making level or an immediate adviser with respect to the exercise of the constitutional or legal powers of the office. The exemption set forth in the preceding sentence shall not include employees subject to the civil service laws of a State government, govern- mental agency or political subdivision." (6) At the end of subsection (h) insert before the period a comma and the follow- ing: "and further includes any governmental Industry, business, or activity". (7) After subsection (1) insert the follow- ing new subsection (j) : "(j) The term 'religion' includes all as- pects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer dem- onstrates that he is unable to reasonably ac- commodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business." SEC. 3. Section 702 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 255; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-1) is amended to read as follows: "EXEMPTION "SEC. 702. This title shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious cor- poration, association, educational institu- tion, or society with respect to the employ- ment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carry- ing on by such corporation, association, edu- cational institution, or society of its activi- ties." SEC. 4. (a) Subsections (a) through (g) of section 706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 269; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5 (a)-(g) ) are amended to read as follows: "Szo. 705. (a) The Commission is empow- ered, as hereinafter provided, to prevent any person from engaging in any unlawful em- ployment practice as set forth in section 703 or 704 of this title. '(b) Whenever a charge is filed by or on be- half of a person claiming to be aggrieved, or by a member of the Commission, alleging that an employer employment agency, la- bor organization, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on- the-job training programs, has engaged in an unlawful employment practice, the Com- mission shall serve a notice of the charge (in- cluding the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice) on such employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-manage- ment committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent') within ten days, and shall make an investigation thereof. Charges shall be in writing under oath or affirmation and shall contain such information and be in such form as the Commission requires. Charges shall not be made public by the Commission. If the Commission determines after such investigation that there is not reasonable cause to believe that the charge Is true, it shall dismiss the charge and promptly notify the person claiming to be aggrieved and the respondent of its action. In determining whether reasonable cause exists, the Commission shall accord substan- tial weight to iinai findings and orders made by State or local authorities in proceedings commenced under State or local law pursu- ant to the requirements of subsections (c) and (d). If the Commission determines after such investigation that there is reasonable cause to believe that the charge is true, the Commission shall endeavor to eliminate any such alleged unlawful employment practice by informal methods of conference, concilia- tion, and persuasion. Nothing said or done during and as a part of such informal en- deavor may be made public by the Commis- sion, its officers or employees, or used as evi- dence in a subsequent proceeding without the ivritten consent of the persons concerned. Any person who makes public information in violation of this subsection shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. The Commission shall make its determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and, so far as prac- ticable, not later than one hundred and twenty days from the filing of the charge or, where applicable under subsection (c) or (d), from the date upon which the Com- mission is authorized to take action with respect to the charge. "(c) In the case of an alleged unlawful employment practice occurring in a State, or political subdivision of a State, which has a State or local law prohibiting the unlaw- ful employment practice alleged and estab- lishing or authorizing a State or local au- thority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, no charge may be filed under subsec- tion (a) by the person aggrieved before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State or local law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated, provided that such sixty- day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State or local law. If any requirement for the commencement of such proceedings is imposed by a State or local authority other than a requirement of the filing of a written and signed statement of the facts upon which the proceeding is based, the proceeding shall be deemed to have been commenced for the purposes of this subsection at the time such statement is sent by registered mail to the appropriate State or local authority. "(d) In the case of any charge filed by a member of the Commission alleging an un- lawful employment practice occurring in a State or political subdivision of a State which has a State or local law prohibiting the prac- tice alleged and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or seek re- lief from such practice or to institute crimi- nal proceedings with respect thereto upon 'receiving notice thereof, the Commis- sion shall, before taking any action with re- spect to such charge, notify the appropriate State or local officials and, upon request, af- ford them a reasonable time, but not less than sixty days (provided that such sixty- day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective day of such State or local law), unless a shorter period is requested, to act under such State or local law to remedy the practice alleged. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RD1373B00296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 20/8 011/9.8itiedliT73MMR000400100021-4 March 2, 1972 CONGRESSioN RPA 18 Pa. Rosenthal Roush Rousselot Roy Roybal Ruppe Ruth Ryan St Germain Sandman Sarbanes Satterfield Saylor Scherle Scheuer Schneebeli Schwengel Scott Sebelius Selberling Shriver Sikes Sisk Skubitz Slack Smith, Calif. Smith, Iowa Smith, N.Y. Bennett Crane de is Garza Duncan Findley Anderson, Tenn. Andrews Annunzio Ashbrook Baring Blatnik Brasco Camp Carey, N.Y. Chisholm Clay Collins, Ill. Dwyer Eckhardt Edwards, La. Frey Galifianakis Goldwater Grasso Snyder Spence Staggers Stanton, J. William Stanton, James V. Steed Steele Steiger, Ariz. Steiger, .Wis.. Stratton Stuckey Sullivan Symington Waggonner Waldie Ware Whalen Whalley White Whitehurst Whitten Widnall W.ggins Williams Wilson, Charles H. Winn Wolff Talcott Wright Taylor Wyatt Teague, Calif. Wydler Teague, Tex. Wylie , Terry Wyman Thompson. Ga. Yates Thompson. N.J. Yatron Thomson, Wis. Young, Fla. Thone Young, Tex, Udall Zablocki Ullman Zion Van Deerlin Zwach Vander Jagt Vigorito NAYS-14 Flynt Gross Hall Mathis, Ga. Nichols NOT VOTING-5'7 Ranch Robinson, Va. Runnels Schmitz Hebert Jonas Kemp Kluczynski Kyros Landgrebe Latta Long. Md. McCloskey McDonald. Mich. McMillan Macdonald, Mass. Madden Mann Martin Metcalfe Mitchell Morgan O'Hara O'Neill Poage Powell Pryor, Ark. Pucinski Purcell Riegle Rostenkowski Shipley Shoup Springer Stephens Stokes Stubblefield Tiernan Vanik Veysey Wampler Wilson, Bob So the bill was passed. The Clerk announced the following pairs: Mr. O'Neill with Mr. Andrews. Mr. Stokes with Mr. Blatnik. Mr. Annunzio with Mr. Bob Wilson. Mr. BTEESCO with Mr. Goldwater. Mr. Rostenkowski with Mr. McDonald Of Michigan. Mr. Hebert wit'i Mr. Martin. Mr. Carey of New York with Mr. Clay, Mr. Kluczynski with Mr. Springer. Mr. Collins of Illinois with Mr. Kyros. Mr. Macdonald of Massachusetts with Mr. Kemp. Mr. Stubblefield with Mr. Ashbrook. Mr. Tiernan with Mr. Camp. Mr. O'Hara with Mrs. Chisholm. Mr. Long of Maryland with Mr. Metcalfe. Mr. Shipley with Mr. Frey. Mr. Stephens with Mr. Landgrebe. Mr. Anderson of Tennessee with Mr. Latta. Mr. Eckhardt with Mr. McCloskey. Mr. Purcell with Mr. Riegle. Mrs. Grasso with Mrs. Dwyer. Mr. Vanik with Mr. Powell. Mr. Mann with Mr. Jones. Mr. Mitchell with Mr. Baring. Mr. Pucinski with Mr. Shoup. Mr. Madden with Mr. Veysey. Mr. Morgan with Mr. Wampler. Mr. McMillan with Mr. Galifianakis. Mr. CONYERS changed his vote from "nay" to "yea." The title was amended so as to read: "A bill to amend the Act of September 30, 1965,- relating to high-speed ground transportation, to enlarge the authority of the Secretary to undertake research and development, to remove the termi- nation date thereof, and for other pur- poses." A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the pro- visions of House Resolution 850, the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce is discharged from further consideration of the bill S. 979. The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill. MOTION OFFERED BY MR. STAGGERS Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion. The Clerk read as follows: Mr. STAGGERS moves to strike out all after the enacting clause of the bill S. 979 and to insert in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 11384, as passed. The motion was agreed to. The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, a passed. e title was amended so as to read: "A b 1 to amend the Act of September 30, i95, relating to high-speed ground transom tion, to enlarge the authority of the retary to undertake research and devel ment, to remove the termina- tion date ereof, and for other pur- poses.". A motion ? reconsider was laid on the table. A similar Ho e bill (KA. 11384) was laid on the table GENERA LEAVE Mr. STAGGERS. r. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent t all Members have 5 legislative days which to ex- tend their remarks o the bill just Passed. The SPEAKER. Is ther objection to the request of the gentlemai from West Virginia? There was no objection. CORRECTION OF ROLLC Mr. BIAGGI. Mr. Speaker, on ?llcall No. 53, on February 29, a quorum all, I am recorded as absent. I was presen and answered to my name. I ask unani 'us consent that the permanent RECORD d Journal be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objection the request of the gentleman from Ne York? There was no objection. CORRECTION OF VOTE Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Speaker, on roll- call No. 60 I am recorded as not voting. I was present and voted "yea." I ask unanimous consent that the RECORD be corrected accordingly. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio? There was no objection. LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM (Mr. GERALD R. FORD asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for the purpose of asking H 1693 the distinguished majority leader the program for the remainder of the week, if any, and the schedule for next week. Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, will the dis- tinguished gentleman yield? Mr. GEtt,ALD R. FORD. I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana. Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, in reply to the distinguished minority leader, this completes the program for this week, and I shall ask unanimous consent to go over until Monday after adjournment today. The program for next week is as follows: Monday there will be a call of the Con- sent Calendar, to be followed by con- sideration of nine suspensions, as fol- lows: S. 1975, minimum age for Federal court jurors; H.R. 2589, jury qualification form change; Senate Joint Resolution 190, Commis- sion on the Bankruptcy Laws Terms Extension; H.R. 12828, veterans' education and training amendments; S. 860, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; H.R. 12749, saline water conversion program; H.R. 10390, Indian Claims Commis- sion; H.R. 8763, Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area; and H.R. 10834, authorizing Alaska to op- erate a ferry. Tuesday there will be a call of the Private Calendar, and also a motion to send to conference S. 659, the Omnibus Education Amendments of 1972, with Senate amendment thereto. For Wednesday and the balance of the week there will be consideration of the following: H.R. 11624, Tramp? 72 at Dulles Air- port, authorization, subject to a rule be- ing granted; H.R. 1746, Equal Employment Oppor- tunities Act, a conference report; and H.R. 10420, Marine Mammal Protec- tion Act, subject to a rule being granted. Conference reports, of course, may be called up at any time, and any further program will be announced later. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa. Mr. GROSS. I thank the gentleman or yielding. What is the future for that long list of ember bills which were killed off yes- day or the day before yesterday, w chever it was? r. BOGGS. I am unable to answer the entleman's inquiry. I have not dis- cuss'' the matter with the distinguished chair ian of the Ways and Means Com- mittee. I would think that the gentleman would 6- free to call them up again un- der una imous consent, or, if necessary, to obtairikrules. I would not want to slow down any presidentiia candidate's campaign, but it might be helpful to know as soon as pos- sible when we are going to be faced with that bunch of bills. The gentleman might notice they are not called up ,for next Tuesday, at any rate. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 2, /94proved For RkIMPSIZ "(e) A charge under this section shall be filed within one hundred and eighty days after the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice occurred and notice of the charge (in- cluding the date, Place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment practice) shall be served upon the person against whom such charge is made within ten days there- after, except that in a case of an unlawful employment practice with respect to which the person aggrieved has initially instituted proceedings with a State or local agency with authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, such charge shall be filed by or on be- half of the person aggrieved within three hundred days after the alleged unlawful em- ployment practice occurred,, or within thirty days after receiving notice that the State or local agency has terminated the proceedinge under the State or local law, whichever- is earlier, and a copy of such charge shall be filed by the Commission with the State or local agency. "(f) (1) If within thirty days after a charge is filed with the Commission or within thirty days after expiration of any period of reference under subsection (c) or (d), the Commission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation agreement ac- ceptable to the Commission, the Commis- sion may bring a civil action against any respondent not a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision named in the charge. In the case of a respondent which is a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision, if the Commission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation agreement acceptable to the Commission, the Commission shall take no further action and shall refer the case to the Attorney General who may bring a civil ac- tion against such respondent in the appro- priate United States district court. The per- son or persons aggrieved shall have the right to intervene in a civil action brought by the Commission or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agen- cy, or political subdivision. If a charge filed with the Commission pursuant to subsection (b) is dismissed by the Commission, or if within one hundred and eighty days from the filing of such charge or the expiration of any period of reference under subsection (c) or (d), whichever is later, the Commis- sion has not filed a civil action under this section or the Attorney General has not filed a civil action in a case involving a govern- ment, governmental agency, or political sub- division, or the Commission has not entered into a conciliation agreement to which the person aggrieved is a party, the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency, or po- litical subdivision, shall so notify the person aggrieved and within ninety days after the giving of such notice a civil action may be brought against the respondent named in the charge (A) by the person claiming to be aggrieved or (B) if such charge was filed by a member of the Commission, by any person whom the charge alleges was aggrieved by the alleged unlawful employment practice. Up- on application by the complainant and in such circumstances as the court may deem just, the court may appoint an attorney for such complainant and may authorize the commencement of the action without the payment of fees, costs, or security. Upon timely application, the court may, in its discretion, permit the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a gov- ernment, governmental agency, or political subdivision, to intervene in such civil action upon certification that the case is of general public importance. Upon request, the court may, in its discretion, stay further proceed- ings for not more than sixty days pending the termination of State or local proceedings described in subsections (c) or (d) of this VIONAL cmsosleb313.0PAPM00400100021-4 section or further efforts of the Commission to obtain voluntary compliance. "(2) Whenever a charge i.e filed with the Commission and the Commission concludes on the basis of a preliminary investigation that prompt judicial action is necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, the Com- mission, or the Attorney General in a case Involving a government, governmental agen- cy, or political subdivision, may bring an action for appropriate temporary or prelim- inary relief pending final disposition of such charge. Any temporary restraining order or other order granting preliminary or tempo- rary relief shall be issued in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proce- dure. It shall be the duty of a court having jurisdiction over proceedings under this sec- tion to assign cases for hearing at the earliest practicable date and to cause such cases to be in every way expedited. "(3) Each United States district court and each United States court of a place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this title. Such an action may be brought in any judicial district in the State in which the unlawful employment practice is alleged to have been committed, in the judicial dis- trict in which the employment records rele- vant to such practice are maintained and ad- ministered, or in the judicial district in which the aggrieved person would have worked but for the alleged unlawful employment prac- tice, but if the respondent is not found within any such district, such an action may be brought within the judicial district in which the respondent has his principal office. For purposes of section 1404 and 1406 of title 28 of the United States Code, the judi- cial district in which the respondent has his principal office shall in all cases be con- sidered a district in which the action might have been brought. "(4) It shall be the duty of the.chief judge of the district (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) in which the case is pending Immediately to designate a judge in such district to hear and determine the case. In the event that no judge in the district is available to hear and determine the case, the chief judge of the district, or the acting chief judge, as .the case nay be, shall certify this fact to the chief judge of the circuit (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) who shall then designate a district or circuit judge of the circuit to hear and determine the case. "(5) It shall be the duty of the judge designated pursuant to this subsection to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date and to cause the case to be in every way expedited. If such judge has not scheduled the case for trial within one hun- dred and twenty days after issue has been joined, that judge may appoint a master pursuant to rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "(g) If the court finds that the respondent has intentionally engaged in or is inten- tionally engaging in an unlawful employ- ment practice charged in the complaint, the court may enjoin the respondent from en- gaging in such unlawful employment prac- tice, and order such affirmative action as may be appropriate, which may include, but is not limited to, reinstatement or hiring of employees, with or without back pay (pay- able by the employer, employment agency, or labor organization, as the case may be, responsible for the unlawful employment practice), or any other equitable relief as the court deems appropriate. Back pay liabil- ity shall not accrue from a date more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission. Interim earnings or amounts earnable with reasonable diligence by the person or persons discriminated against shall operate to reduce the back pay otherwise allowable. No order of the court shall require the admission or reinstate- ment of an individual as a member of a II 1695 union, or the hiring, reinstatement, or promotion of an individual as an employee, or the payment to him of any back pay, if such individual was refused admission, sus- pended, or expelled, or was refused employ- ment or advancement or was suspended or discharged for any reason other than dis- crimination on account of race, color, reli- gion, sex, or national origin or in violation of section 704 (a) ." (b) (1) Subsection (1) of section '706 of such Act is amended by striking out "sub- section (e) " and inserting in lieu thereof "this section". (2) Subsection (j) of such section is amended by striking out "subsection (e) " and inserting in lieu thereof "this section". SEC. 5. Section 707 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(c) Effective two years after the date of enactment of the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972, the functions of the At- torney General under this section shall be transferred to the Commission, together with such personnel, property, records, and un- expended balances of appropriations, alloca- tions, and other funds employed, used, held, available, or to be made available in connec- tion with such functions unless the President submits, and neither Rouse of Congress vetoes, a reorganization plan pursuant to chapter 9 of title 5, United States Code, in- consistent with the provisions of this sub- section. The Commission shall carry out such functions in accordance with subsection (d) and (e) of this section. "(d) Upon the transfer of functions pro- vided for in subsection (c) of this section in all suits commenced pursuant to this section prior to the date of such transfer, proceed- ings shall continue without abatement, all court orders and decrees shall remain in ef- fect, and the Commission shall be substi- tuted as a party for the United States of America, the Attorney General, or the Act- ing Attorney General, as appropriate. "(e) Subsequent to he date of enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, the Commission shall have authority to investigate and act on a charge of a pattern or practice of discrimination, whether filed by or on behalf of a person claiming to be aggrieved or by a member of the Commis- sion. All such actions shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 706 of' this Act." SEC. 6. Subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 263; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-8 (h) (d) ) are amended to read as follows: "(b) The Commission may coopersje_wieh State and local agencies charged with the administration of State fair employment practices laws and, with the consent of such agencies, may, for the purpose of carrying out its functions and duties under this title and within the limitation of funds appro- priated specifically for such purpose, engage in and contribute to the cost of research and other projects of mutual interest undertaken by such agencies, and utilize the services of such agencies and their employees, and, not- withstanding any other provision of law, pay by advance or reimbursement such agen- cies and their employees for services ren- dered to assist the Commission in carrying out this title. In furtherance of such cooper- ative efforts, the Commission may enter into written agreements with such State or local agencies and such agreements may include provisions under which the Commission shall refrain from processing a charge in any cases or class of cases specified in such agreements or under which the Commission shall relieve any person or class of persons in such State or locality from requirements imposed under this section. The Commission shall rescind any such agreement whenever it determines that the agreement no longer serves the in- terest f effective enforcement of this title. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP731300296R000400100021-4 H 1696 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE march 2, 1.972 "(c) Every employer, employment agency, and labor organization subject to this title shall (1) make and keep such records rele- vant to the determinations of whether un- lawful employment practices have been or are being committed, (2) preserve such rec- ords for such periods, and (3) make such re- ports therefrom as the Commission shall pre- sribe by regulation or order, after public hearing, as reasonable, necessary, or appro- priate for the enforcement of this title or the regulations or orders thereunder. The Commission shall, by regulation, require each employer, labor organization, and joint labor- management committee subject to this title which controls an apprenticeship or other training program to maintain such records as are reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes of this title, including, but not limited to, a list of applicants who wish to participate in such program, including the chrondlogical order in which applications were received, and to furnish to the Com- mission upon request, a detailed description of the manner in which persons are selected to participate in the apprenticeship or other training program. Any employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor- management committee which believes that the application to it of any regulation or or- der issued under this section would result in undue hardship may apply to the Commis- sion for an exemption from the application of such regulation or order, and, if such ap- plication for an exemption is denied, bring a civil action in the United States district court for the district where such records are kept. If the Commission or the court, as the case may be, finds that the application of the regulation or order to the employer, employ- ment agency, or labor organization in ques- tion would impose an undue hardship, the Commission or the court, as the case may be, may grant appropriate relief. If any person required to comply with the provisions of this subsection fails or refuses to do so, the United States district court for the district in which such person is found, resides, or transacts business, shall, upon application of the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case involving a government, governmental agency or political subdivision, have juris- diction to issue to such person an order re- quiring him to comply. "(d) In prescribing requirements pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the Com- mission shall consult with other interested State and Federal agencies and shall en- deavor to coordinate its requirements with those adopted by such agencies. The Com- mission shall furnish upon request and with- out cost to any State or local agency charged with the administration of a fair employ- ment practice law information obtained pur- suant to subsection (c) of this section from any employer, employment agency, labor or- ganization, or joint labor-management com- mittee subject to the jurisdiction of such agency. Such information shall be furnished on condition that it, not be made public by the recipient agency prior to the institution of a proceeding under State or local law in- volving such information. If this condition is violated by a recipient agency, the Com- mission may decline to honor subsequent re- quests pursuant to this subsection." SEC. '7. Section 710 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 264; 42 U.S.C. 2000e--9) is amended to read as follows: . "INVESTIGATORY POWERS "SEC. '710. For the purpose of all hearings and investigations conducted by the Com- mission or its duly authorized agents or agen- cies, section 11 of the National Labor Rela- tions Act (49 Stat. 455; 29 U.S.C. 161) shall apply." SEC. 8. (a) Section 703(a) (2) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 255; 42 U.S.C. 2000-e-2(a) (2)) is amended by inserting the words. "or applicants for employment" after the words "his employees." (b) Section 703(c) (2) of such Act is amended by inserting the words "or appli- cants for membership" after the word "mem- bership". (c) (1) Section 704(a) of such Act is emended by inserting a comma and the fol- lowing: "or joint labor-management com- mittee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs," after "employment agency". (2) Section 704(b). of such Act is amended by (A) striking out "or employment agency" niid inserting in lieu thereof "employment agency, or joint labor-management commit- tee controlling apprenticeship or other train.- lug or retraining, including on-the-job train- ing programs,", and (E) inserting a comma and the words "or relating to admission to, or employment in, any program established 10 provide apprenticeship or other training by such a joint labor-management commit- t ee" before the word "indicating". (d) Section '705(a) of the Civil Rights Act or 1964 (78 Stat. 258; 42 U.S.C. 2000e.-4(a)) is amended to read as follows: "SEC. 705. (a) There is hereby created a Commission to be known as the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission, which shall be composed of five members, not more than three of whom shall be members of the same political party. Members of the Com- mission shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of .the Senate for a term of five years. Any indi- vidual chosen to fill a vacancy shall be ap- pointed only for the unexpired term of the member whom he shall succeed, and all members of the Commission shall continue to serve until their successors are appointed and qualified, except that no such member of the Commission shall continue to serve (1) for more than sixty days when the Con- gress is in session unless a nomination to till such vacancy shall have been submitted to the Senate, or (2) after the adjournment sine die of the session of the Senate in which such nomination was submitted. The Pres- ident shall designate one member to serve as Chairman of the Commission, and one member to serve as Vice Chairman, The Chairman shall be responsible on behalf of the Commission for the administrative op- erations of the Commission, and, except as provided in subsection (b), shall appoint, in accordance with the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, such officers, agents, attorneys, hearing examiners, and employees as he deems necessary to assist it in the performance of its functions and to fix their compensation in accordance with the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United. States Code, relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates: Provided, That assign- ment, removal, and compensation of hearing examiners shall be in accordance with sec- tions 3105, 3344, 5362, and 7521 of title 5, United States Code." (e) (1) Section 705 of such Act is amend- ed by inserting after subsection (a) the fol- lowing new subsection (b) : "(b) (1) There shall be a General Counsel of the Commission appointed by the Presi- dent, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a term of four years. The Gen- eral Counsel shall have responsibility for the conduct of litigation as provided in sections 706 and 707 of this title. TheGeneral Coun- sel shall have such other duties as the Com- mission may prescribe or as may be provided by law and shall concur with the Chairman of the Commission on the appointment and supervision of regional attorneys. The Gen- eral Counsel of the Commission on the ef- fective date of this Act shall continue in such position and perform the functions specified in this subsection until a successor is appointed and qualified. "(2) Attorneys appointed under this sec- tion may, at the direction of the Commis- sion, appear for and represent the Commis- sion many case in court, provided that the Attorney General shall conduct all litigation to which the Commission is a party in the Supreme Court pursuant to this title." (2) Subsections (e) and (h) of such sec- tion 705 are repealed. (3) Subsections (b), (c), (d), (i), and (j) of such section 705, and all references thereto, are redesignated as subsections (c), (d), (e), (h.), and (i), respectively. (f) Section 705(g) (6) of such Act, is amended to read as follows: "(6) to intervene in a civil action brought under section '706 by an aggrieved party against a respondent other than a govern- ment, governmental agency or political sub- division." (g) Section 714 of such Act is amended to read as follows: "FORCIBLY RESISTING THE COMMISSION OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES "SEC. 714. The provisions of sections 111 and 1114, title 18, United States Code, shall apply to officers, agents, and employees of the Commission in the performance of their official duties. Notwithstanding the provi- sions of sections 111 and 1114 of title 18. United States Code, whoever in violation of the provisions of section 1114 of such title kills a person while engaged in or on ac- count of the performance of his official func- tions under this Act shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life." SEC. 9. (a) Section 5314 of title 5 of the United States Code is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: "(58) Chairman, Equal Employment Op- portunity Commission." (b) Clause (72) of section 5315 of such title is amended to read as follows: "(72) Members, Equal Employment Op- portunity Commission (4)." (c) Clause (111) of section 5316 of such title is repealed. (d) Section 5316 of such title is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: "(131) General Counsel of the Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission." SEC. 10. Section 715 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended to read as follows: "EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COORDINAT- ING COUNCIL "SEC. 715. There shall be established an Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinat- ing Council (hereinafter referred to in this section as the Council) composed of the Sec- retary of Labor, the Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Attorney General, the Chairman of the Unit- ed States Civil Service Commission, and the Chairman of the United States Civil Rights Commission, or their respective delegates. The Council shall have the responsibility for developing and implementing agreements, policies and practices designed to maximize effort, promote efficiency, and eliminate con- flict, competition, duplication and incon- sistency among the operations, functions and jurisdictions of the various departments, agencies and branches of the Federal Gov- ernment responsible for the implementation and enforcement of equal employment op- portunity legislation, orders, and policies. On or before July 1 of each year, the Coun- cil shall transmit to the President and to the Congress a report of its activities, to- gether with such recommendations for leg- islative or administrative changes as it con- cludes are desirable to further promote the purposes of this section." Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 -Marc7, 2, 1972 Approved FcAiMsFAtkii/661/2PEW13137131116SA6R000400100021-4 H 1697 SEC. 11. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1961 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT "Sac. 717. (a) All personnel actions af- fecting employees or applicants for employ- ment (except with regard to aliens employed outside the limits of the United States) in military departments as defined in section 102 of title 5, United States Code, in execu- tive agencies (other than the General Ac- counting Office) as defined in section 105 of title 5, 'United States Code (including em- ployees and applicants for employment who are paid from nonappropriated funds)., in the United States Postal Service and the Postal Rate Commission, in those units of the government of the District of Colum- bia having positions in the competitive serv- ice, and in those units of the legislative and judicial branches of the Federal Gov- ernment having positions in the competitive service, and in the Library of Congress shall be made free from any discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. "(b) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Civil Service Commission shall have authority to enforce the provi- sions of subsection (a) through appropriate remedies, including reinstatement & hiring of employees with or without back pay, as will effectuate the policies of this section, and shall issue such rules, regulations, or- ders and instructions as it deems necessary and appropriate to carry out its responsi- bilities under this section. The Civil Service Commission shall? (1) be responsible for the annual review and approval of a national and regional equal employment opportunity plan which each department and agency and each appropri- ate unit referred to in subsection (a) of this section shall submit in order to maintain an affirmative program of equal employment opportunity for all such employees and ap- plicants for employment; "(2) be responsible for the review and evaluation of the operation of all agency equal employment opportunity programs, periodically obtaining and publishing (on at least a semiannual basis) progress reports from each such department, agency, or unit; and "(3) consult with and solicit the recom- mendations Of interested individuals, groups, and organizations relating to equal employ- ment opportunity. The head of each such department, agency, or unit shall comply with such rules, regu- lations, orders, and instructions which shall include a provision that an employee or ap- plicant for employment shall be notified of any final action taken on any complaint of discrimination filed by him thereunder. The plan submitted by each department, agency, and unit shall include, but not be limited to? "(1) provisions for the establishment of training and education programs designed to provide a maximum opportunity for em- ployees to advance so as to perform at their highest potential; and "(2) a description of the qualifications in terms of training and experience relating to equal employment opportunity for the prin- cipal and operating officials of each such department, agency, or unit responsible for carrying out the equal employment oppor- tunity program and of the allocation of per- sonnel and resources proposed by such de- partment, agency, or unit to carry out its equal employment opportunity program. With respect to employment in the Library of Congress, authorities granted in this sub- section to the Civil Service Commission shall be exercised by the Librarian of Congress. "(c) Within thirty days of receipt of no- tice of final action taken by a department, agency, or unit referred to in subsection 717(a), or by the Civil Service Commission upon an appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency, or unit on a com- plaint of discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin, brought pur- suant to subsection (a) of this section, Ex- ecutive Order 11478 or any succeeding Exec- utive orders, or after one hundred and eighty days from the filing of the initial charge with the department, agency, or unit or with the Civil Service Commission on appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency, or unit until such time as final ac- tion may be taken by a department, agency, or unit, an employee or applicant for em- ployment, if aggrieved by the final disposi- tion of his complaint, or by the failure to take final action on his complaint, may file a civil action as provided in section 706, in which civil action the head of the depart- ment, agency, or unit, as appropriate, shall be the defendant. "(d) The provisions of section 706 (f) through (k), as applicable, shall govern-civil actions brought hereunder. "(e) Nothing contained in this Act shall relieve any Government agency or official of its or his primary responsibility to assure nondiscrimination in employment as re- quired by the Constitution and statutes or of its or his responsibilities under Executive Order 11478 relating to equal employment opportunity in the Federal Government." SEC. 12. Section 5108(c) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by? (1) striking out the word "and" at the end of paragraph (9); (2) striking out the period at the end of paragraph (10) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and the word "and"; and (3) by adding immediately after para- graph (10) the last time it appears therein in the following new paragraph: "(11) the Chairman of the Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission, subject to the standards and procedures prescribed by this chapter, may place an additional ten positions in the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission in GS-16. 05-17, and GS-18 for the purposes of carrying out title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." SEC. 13. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) is further amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "SPECIAL PROVISION WITH RESPECT TO DENIAL, TERMINATION, AND SUSPENSION OF GOVERN- MENT CONTRACTS "SEC. 718. No Government contract, or por- tion thereof, with any employer, shall be denied, withheld, terminated, or suspended, by any agency or officer of the United States under any equal employment opportunity law or order, where such employer has an affirmative action plan which has previously been accepted by the Government for the same facility within the past twelve months without first according such employer full hearing and adjudication under the provi- sions of title 5, United States Code, section 551, and the following pertinent sections: Provided, That if such employer has deviated substantially from such previously agreed to affirmative action plan, this section shall not apply; Provided further, That for the pur- poses of this section an affirmative action plan shall be deemed to have been accepted by the Government at the time the appro- priate compliance agency has accepted such plan unless within forty-five days thereafter the Office of Federal Contract Compliance has disapproved such plan." Sac. 11. The amendments made by this Act to section 706 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 shall be applicable with respect to charges pending with the Commission on the date of enactment of this Act and all charges filed thereafter. And the Senate agree to the same. CARL D. PERKINS, JOHN H. DENT, AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, PATSY T. MINK, PHILLIP BURTON, WM. L. (BILL) CLAY, JOSEPH M. GAYDOS, WILLIAM D. FORD, MARIO BIAGGI, ROMANO L. MAZZOLI, ROMAN C. PUCINSKI, JOHN BRADEMAS, ALBERT H. QUIE, JOHN N. ERLENBORN, ALPHONZO BELL, MARVIN L. ESCH, EARL F. LANDGREBE, ORVAL HANSEN, WILLIAM A. STETGER, JACK KEMP, Managers on the Part of the House. HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JENNINGS RANDOLPH, CLAIBORNE PELL, GAYLORD NELSON, THOMAS F. EAGLETON, ADLA/ E. STEVENSON, HAROLD E. HUGHES, JACOB K. JAVITS, RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, BOB PACKWOOD, ROBERT TAFT, Jr., ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Managers on the Part of the Senate. JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF MANAGERS AT THE CONFERENCE ON H.R. 1746 To FUR- THER PROMOTE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPOR- TUNITIES FOR AMERICAN WORKERS The managers on the part of the House and Senate at the conference on the dis- agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 1746) an Act to further promote equal em- ployment opportunities for American work- ers, submit the following Joint statement to the House and Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the managers and recommended in the accom- panying conference report. The points in disagreement and the con- ference resolution of them are as follows: The House bill provided the short title "Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1971". The Senate amendment provided the short title "Equal Employment Opportuni- ties Enforcement Act of 1972". The Senate receded with an amendment changing the date in the House provision to 1972. Under the House bill, there was no pro- vision for an expansion of coverage of Title VII. The Senate amendment expanded cover- age to include: (1) State and local governments, govern- mental agencies, political subdivisions (ex- cept for elected officials, their personal as- sistants and immediate advisors) and the District of Columbia departments and agen- cies (except where such are subject by law to the Federal competitive service). State agencies previously covered by reference to the United States Employment Service con- tinue to be covered; and (2) employers who employ 15 or more full-time employees and labor organizations with 15 or more members beginning one year after enactment. In addition, the Senate amendment in- cluded a new definition of "religion" to in- clude all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an em- ployer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious otserv- ance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 II 1698 Approved For ReidialsTC211114DBITMLCKEIDRE8B0012980$00400100021-411arch 2,- 1 9 72- The House receded with an amendment exempting, in addition to State and local government elected officials, persons chosen by such officials to be on their personal staffs, appointees of such officials on a pol- icymaking level or immediate advisors of such elected officials. The exemption does not include civil service employees. It is the intention of the conferees to ex- empt elected officials and members of their personal staffs, and persons appointed by such elected officials as advisors or to policy- making positions at the highest levels of the departments or agencies of State or local governments, such as cabinet officers, and persons with oomparable responsibilities at the local level. It is the conferees intent that this exemption shall be construed narrowly. Also, all employees subject to State or local civil service laws are not exempted. The Senate amendment eliminated the present exemption from Title VII for edu- cational institutions. Also, the Senate pro- vision expanded the exemption for religious organizations from coverage under this title with respect to the employment of individu- als of a particular religion in all their ac- tivities instead of the present limitation to religious activities. The House bill did not change the existing exemptions. The House receded. Both the House bill and Senate amend- ment contained procedures for filing of charges. The Senate amendment provided for charges to be filed by or on behalf of a person claiming to be aggrieved, or by an officer or employee of the Commission upon request of any person claiming to be ag- grieved. Charges were to be in writing under oath or affirmation and in the specific form required by the Commission. The Senate amendment further provided that the Com- mission serve a notice of the charge includ- ing the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful employment practice on the respondent within 10 days. Under the Senate amendment, the Commission would dismiss the charge if it determined after investigation that there was not reasonable cause to believe the charge was true and would be required to accord substantial weight to the decision of state and local authorities under state and local equal em- ployment opportunity laws in making such reasonable cause determination. The Senate amendment also required the Commission to make its determination so far as prac- ticable not later than 120 days from the date the Commission was authorized to act on the charge. The House bill provided for charges to be filed by the person claiming to be aggrieved or by a member of the Commission if he had reasonable cause to believe a violation oc- curred. The Commissioner's charge had to set forth the facts upon which it was based and the person or persons aggrieved. The House bill also provided that the Commis- sion furnish the respondent with a copy of the charge within five days. Both the House bill and the Senate amendment prohibited disclosure of anything said or done during informal conciliation efforts without the consent of the parties. The Senate receded with an amendment providing that charges be filed by or on be- half of the person claiming to be aggrieved or by a member of the Commission, alleging that an unlawful employment practice oc- curred. Charges are to be in writing under oath for affirmation and in such form as the Commission requires. A notice of a charge including the date, place and circum- stances of the alleged unlawful employment practice is to be served on the respondent within 10 days. If the Commission determince after investigation that there is not reason- able cause to believe the charge is true, it shall dismiss the charge and notify the par- ties. The Commission is required to accord substantial weight to the decision of the state or local authorities under state or local equal employment opportunity laws and to make the determination on reasonable cause as promptly as possible and so far as p:racticable not later than 120 days from the date the Commission was author- ized to act on the charge. If the Commission determines that there is reasonable cause to believe the charge is true, it shall attempt conciliation in conformity with the require- ments of existing law. Nothing said or done during conciliation may be disclosed without the consent of the parties. The Senate amendment contained two provisions allowing the Commission to defer to state and, local equal employment oppor- tunity agencies. It deleted the language of existing law providing that no charge may be filed during the 60-day period allowed for the deferral and substituted a provision pro- hibiting the Commission from acting on such a charge until the expiration of the 60-day period .The House bill made no change in existing law. The Senate receded with an amendment that would re-state the exist- ing law on the deferral of charges to state agencies. The conferees left existing law in- tact with the understanding that the de- cision in Love's v. Pullman,?U.S.?(Febru- ary 17, 1972) interpreting the existing law to allow the Coil-mission to receive a charge (but not act on it) during such deferral period is controlling. Both the House bill and the Senate amend- ment provided that charges be filed within 180 days. The Senate allowed an additional 120 ,days if a charge is deferred. to a state agency and the House allowed only 30 addi- tional days. The Senate amendment required that notice of the charge be served in 10 days. The House bill provided that charges under Title VII are the exclusive remedy for unlawful employment practices. The House receded. Both the House bill and the Senate amend- ment authorized the bringing of civil actions in Federal district courts in cases involving unlawful employment practices. The Senate amendment provided that the AttorneY General bring actions against state and local governments. As to other respond- ents, suits were to be brought by the Com- mission. The Senate amendment permitted suits by the Commission or the Attorney General if the Commission was unable to secure from the respondent "a conciliation agreement acceptable to the Commission" while the House bill permitted the Commis- sion to sue if it is unable to obtain "volun- tary compliance." The Senate amendment permitted aggrieved persons to intervene in suits and allowed a private action if no case is brought by the Commission or Attorney General within 150 days. The House bill per- mitted a private action after 180 days. The Senate amendment allowed the General Counsel or Attorney General to intervene in private actions; the House bill permitted only the Attorney General to intervene. The Senate amendment permitted a private ac- tion in a case- where the Commission entered into a conciliation agreement to which the aggrieved person was not a party (i.e. a signatory). The conferees adopted a provision allow- ing the Commission, or the Attorney General in a case against a state or local government agency, to bring an action in Federal district courts if the Commission is unable to secure from the respondent "a conciliation agree- ment aceptable to the Commission." Ag- grieved parties are permitted to intervene. They may bring a private action if the Com- mission or Attorney General has not brought suit within 180 days or the Commission has entered into a conciliation agreement to which such aggrieved party is not a signatory. The Commission, or the Attorney General in. a case involving state and local govern- ments, may intervene in such private action. The Senate amendment provided for the appointment of a three judge district court in cases certified to be of general public im- portance, provided for the immediate desig- nation of a single judge if no three judge court was requested, and required cases to be assigned for hearing at the earliest prac- ticable date and to be expedited in every way. The House bill contained no such provision. The Senate receded with an amendment Which provides that the chief judge of the district in which a case is filed designate the judge to hear the case which is to be assigned for hearing at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way. The amendment deleted the provision for the three judge dis- trict court. Such a court is now provided for in "pattern or practice" cases. The Senate amendment authorized the Commission or the Attorney General to seek preliminary injunctive relief. The House bill authorized the Commission to seek prelim- inary relief and required a showing that sub- stantial and irreparable injury to the ag- grieved party would be unavoidable. The Senate, receded with an amendment that au- thorizes the Commission or the Attorney Gen- eral to seek preliminary injunctive relief and a provision that Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should govern all actions brought under this subsection. The Senate amendment restated existing law as to venue for civil actions except that the term "aggrieved person" was substituted for the word "plaintiff.' The House bill left existing law intact. The House receded. The House bill and the Senate amendment provided for the scope of relief that could be granted by the district courts. The dif- ferences were as follows: 1. The Senate amendment required a find- ing that the respondent engaged in an un- lawful employment practice and the House bill required a finding that respondent -in- tentionally" engaged in such unlawful em- ployment practice. 2. The Senate amendment added the phrase "or any other equitable relief that the court deems appropriate" to the description of the relief available from the court. 3. The Senate amendment limited back' pay liability to that which accrues from a date not more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission; the House bill limited back pay liability to that which accrues- not more than two years before the filing of a complaint with the court. Both the House bill and the Senate amendment provided that interim earnings shall operate to reduce the back pay other- wise allowable. 4. The House bill restated the provisions of existing law prohibiting court-ordered remedies based on any adverse action except unlawful employment practices prohibited under Title VII. 5. The House bill prohibited class action lawsuits. The Senate receded with an amendment that provides the following: 1. A finding that the respondent has in- tionally engaged or is intentionally engag- ing in an unlawful employment practice, as the language of the current law reads. 2. Authority for the court to enjoin the respondent from such practices, order such affirmative action as may be appropriate and any other equitable relief that the court deems appropriate. 3. The court is authorized to award back pay except that such back pay liability is limited to that which accrues from the date not more than two years prior to the filing of a charge with the Commission. Interim earnings shall operate to reduce the back pay otherwise allowable. 4. The provisions of existing law prohibit- ing court ordered remedies based on any adverse action except unlawful employment practices under Title VII are retained. The Senate amendment permitted pay- ment of costs and counsel fees to small em- Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 March 2, 19 72 Approved Feolfiagimagisla/WEMAIRDPrAgiggg96R000400100021-4 H 1699 ployers or labor organizations if they pre- vailed in actions brought against them by the Commission or the United States. An employer or union with 25 or fewer em- ployees or members would have been en- titled to up to $5000, and an employer or labor organization with from 25 to 100 .em- ployees or members whose average income from such employment was less than$7500, would have been entitled to one-half the cost of its defense up to \$2500. The House bill had no comparable provisions. The Sen- ate receded. The Senate amendment authorized the courts to appoint a special master if the district court had not assigned a case for trial within 120 days after issue had been joined. There was no comparable House pro- vision. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided for a transfer of the Attorney General's "pattern or practice" jurisdiction to the Commission two years after enactment. In the interim period there would be concurrent jurisdic- tion. Tilt. transfer would be subject to change in accordance with a presidential reorgani- zation plan if not vetoed by Congress. The ? House bill left pattern or practice jurisdic- tion with the Attorney General. The House receded. The Senate amendment revised the Com- mission's procedures for cooperating with State and local agencies and in its record keeping requirements and provided pro- cedures for compelling compliance with such requirements. The House bill did not amend the provisions of the current law. The House receded. The Senate amendment simplified pro- cedures for subpoenaing witnesses or rec- ords by providing the same investigative au- thority as is contained in the National Labor Relations Act. The House bill made no changes in existing authority. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided for the appointment, with the advice and consent of the Senate, of up to four new commission members at any time atter one year from the effective date of the act. The proportion of commissioners of one political party to an- other would remain the same. Regional Di- rectors were to be appointed by the Chair- man of the Commission with the concurrence of the General Counsel. The Senate amend- ment also placed a limit on the time that a Commissioner may serve after the appoint- ment expires and the Senate has not acted. The House bill contained no such provisions. The Senate receded with an amendment limiting the time that a Commissioner may serve after the appointment expires and the Senate has not acted. The Senate amendment established the office of General Counsel to be appointed by the President for a term of four years with the advice and consent of the Senate. The General Counsel was given the responsibil- ity for filing complaints and the conduct of all litigation for the Commission. Also the General Counsel was given authority to ap- point regional attorneys, with the concur- rence of the Chairman, and other necessary employees. The House bill did not establish a General Counsel, and required that the Attorney General conduct all litigation to which the Commission is a party in the Su- preme Court or in the United States Court of Appeals. All other litigation in which the Commission was a party was to be conducted by the Commission. The Senate receded with an amendment establishing the Office of General Counsel to be appointed by the President for a term of four years with the advice and consent of the Senate giving the General 'Counsel responsibility for litigation and concurrence with the Chairman In the appointment and supervision of regional at- torneys but reserving to the Attorney Gen- eral the conduct of all litigation to which the Commission is a party in the Supreme Court. The Senate amendment permitted the Commission to accept uncompensated serv- ices for the limited purpose of publicizing in the media the Commission and its activ- ities. The House bill did not provide such authority. The Senate receded. The Senate amendment permitted the Commission to delegate certain functions, ex- cept for rulemaking and the power to make agreements with States. The House bill did not contain such a provision. The Senate receded. The Senate amendment afforded additional protection to officers and employees of the Commission in the performance of their official duties by including them within sec- tion 1114 of Title 18, U.S.C. The House bill contained no such provision. The Senate re- ceded with an amendment affording this new protection but excluding capital punishment for offenders. The Senate amendment raised the level of the position of the Chairman and members of the Commission and established the posi- tion of General Counsel in the executive pay scale. The House bill made no provision for such change. The House receded. The Senate amendment established an Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinat- ing Council. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. The Committee of Conference believes that there are instances in which more than one agency may have legitimate interests in the employment standards applicable to a num- ber of employees. So for example, the merit system standards of the Civil Service Com- mission should be considered by the Co- ordinating Council in relation to their effect on the conciliation and enforcement efforts of the Equal Employment Opportunity Com- mission and the Attorney General with re- spect to employees of government, govern- mental agencies or political subdivisions. The Senate amendment provided that all personnel actions involving Federal employees be free from discrimination. This policy was to be enforced by the United States Civil Service Commission. Each agency of the Fed- eral Government would be responsible for establishing an internal grievance procedure and programs to train personnel so as to enable them to advance under the supervi- sion of the Civil Service Commission. If final action had been taken by an agency or the Civil Service Commission, an aggrieved party could bring a civil action under the provisions of section 706. The House bill did not coxer Federal employees. The House receded,,,an providing the statutory basis for such appeal or court access, it is not the intent of the Committee to subordinate any discretionary authority or final judgment now reposed in agency heads by, or under, statute for na- tional security zasons in the interests of the United States." The Senate amendment required consulta- tion among the Executive branch agencies on Equal Employment matters. The House bill had no similar provision. The Senate receded in light of the action of the Conferees in establishing the Equal Employment Opportu- nity Coordinating Council. The Senate amendment provided the Com- mission with authorization for an additional 10 positions at GS-16, GS-17, and GS-18 level. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided that the new enforcement provisions of section 706 apply to charges pending before the Commis- sion on enactment. The House bill was silent. The House receded. The Senate amendment provided that no Government contract, whether subject to Ex- ecutive Order 11246 or any other equal em- ployment opportunity law such as section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, could be terminated, denied, or withheld without a full hearing, where the employer had an affirmative action plan previously accepted within the past twelve months. The House bill had no such provision. The House receded. CARL D. PERKINS, JOHN H. DENT, ATJGUSTIIS F. HAWKINS, PATSY T. MINK, PHILLIP BURTON, WM. L. (BILL) CLAY, JOSEPH M. GAYDOS, WILLIAM D. FORD, MARIO BIAGGI, ROMANO L. MAZZOLI, ROMAN C. PUCINSEI, JOHN BRADEMAS, ALBERT H. QUIE, JOHN N. ERLENBORN, ALPHONZO BELL, MARVIN L. ESCH, EARL F. LANDGREBE, ORVAL HANSEN, WILLIAM A. STEIGER, JACK KEMP, Managers on the Part of the House. HARRISON A. Wiwams, JENNINGS RANDOLPH, CLAIBORNE PELL, GAYLORD NELSON, THOMAS P. EAGLETON, ADLAI E. STEVENSON, HAROLD E. HUGHES, JACOB K. JAVITS, RICHAELD S. SCHWETKER, BOB PACKWOOD, ROBERT TAFT, Jr., ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Managers on the Part of the Senate._sj CONSUMER& NEED PROTECTION FROM DIRY MEAT?NOT MORE OP IT (Mr. MELC ER asked and was given permission to 4ddress the House for 1 minute, to revisk and extend his remarks and include extr neous matter.) Mr. MELCHEH. Mr. Cpeaker, in my household we hkve stopped the use of any meat except American-produced domestic meat 4iich we can examine, as cuts, before thy are cooked and con- sumed. My wife does nkit put or. our break- fast, dinner, or slipper tables any pre- pared meats, hamburger, meat soups, or other products which may contain im- ported meat. As a veterinarian, t have no confidence that many kinds of 'mported meat -can be trusted to be wholesome, healthful and fit for human consumption. I know that in 197 we admitted 11 million pounds of mea into the United States from just seven ustralian plants which were found unfIl to ship to the United States after th determination of unfitness had been iade. I know there were hundreds mor foreign plants found to be dirty and no fit to export to us but that many times the 11 million pounds were admitted from such sub- standard plants abroad bef e they were delisted, or cleaned up, bec use our re- view officers inspect only a ut once a year. Our review staff is ina equate to get around more often than th t. The practice in my home ,of using American meat only is going to Continue until this country cleans up inverted meats by establishing an imported meat Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 H 1700 Approved For Relemarsffi/6&:kedeal90212AWR400100021-4 March 2, 1972 inspection system which provides con- sumer protection instead of a sort of diplomatic immunity from strictly en- forced U.S. inspection requirements. That inspection is-going to have to in- clude testing for chemical residues which might be injurious to health. Our State Department is shielding the exporting countries from a requirement to set standards equal to ours concerning the use of pesticides and other chemicals that are hazards to human health. The House Agriculture Committee knuckled under to overwhelming admin- istration pressure from State and Agri- culture Departments to delete from a bill equal standards for domestic and foreign food producers in the use of chemicals which leave residues injurious to the health of consumers. The miniscule res- idue sampling we do on foreign meat im- ports shows alarming increase of chlo- rinated hydrocarbon residues such as DDT and benzene hexachloride which are banned in this country for us on live- stock. It is quite shocking to me, Mr. Speak- er, that this country is considering in- creasing meat import allowances to roll back th price of our domestic product, instead of talking with exporting coun- tries about the cleanliness and healthful- ness of what we are already getting. The Comptroller General of the United States has recently supplied this Con- gress with a report on inspection of foreign packing plants and meat im- ports?both fresh, chilled, cooked, and canned?that should cause Members to demand suspension of all imports until their wholesomeness and healthfulness can be guaranteed, and we can be as- sured every pound of it was produced in plants that meet American inspection standards under the eyes of reliable in- spectors, and not a corps of people over- awed by diplomatic niceties. The report to me is like a rerun of a bad dream be- cause I cited to the House early in 1970 the glaring shortcomings of inspection of foreign meats. Let me call the House's attention to the sort of thing that is going on in the meatpacking plants that ship to the United States, and what our inspectors, who visit those plants about once a year, and doing about it, as reported by the General Accounting Office. The GAO sent investigators along with our foreign review officers on visits to 80 plants in four countries that export to the United States. In Australia, the source of 505 million pounds of imported beef and veal and 25 million pounds of mutton in 1971, they visited 35 plants-10 of them or nearly 30 percent so bad that they had to be de- listed and denied the right to ship to the United States, but the meat they had already shipped us was not inter- cepted. Until the delisting was officially cleared in Washington and transmitted to the foreign government some 6 weeks later the plants continued to unload their unfit meat on us. One other plant was found not in compliance with our U.S. sanitation and health require- ments, but not so bad that it was de- listed. You can judge what the condi- tions must have been in the "delisted" plants by the description of the one al- lowed to continue in operation. The GAO tells us: The (U.S.) Consumer and Marketing Serv- ice foreign programs officer reported that the (Australian) inspectors at this plant-- Did not require that grossly contaminated carcasses be trimmed before going to the coolers or boning rooms. Did not require that carcasses be dressed in a sanitary manner. In performing examinations on beef heads, passed heads even though there were big balls of ingesta in the mouths. Failed to detect a diseased head which should have been condemned and should have served as the basis for a more com- plete inspection of the carcass. When the foreign programs officer pointed out the con- dition to the Australian inspection officials, the carcass was inspected further and the carcass and parts were condemned. The foreign programs officer reported also that the preoperative sanitation inspection of the plant showed that almost all equip- ment looked at was dirty and that the filth on some equipment was obviously of many days duration. He stated that the Australian inspector inspected some of the same equip- ment but took no action to have the equip- ment cleaned before operations started. The foreign programs officer reported further that he found slaughtering operations in process about 1 hour after the preoperative inspec- tion, that he rechecked some of the equip- ment and found it to be still dirty and that the Australian inspector permitted the slaughtering operations to continue. Despite the above-cited deficiencies, and the fact that no action was taken at the time of the review, C&MS gave Australian inspection offidials the option of correcting the deficiencies or delisting the plants. C&MS officials told us they did not require the plant to be delisted because the deficien- cies pertained mainly to improper inspection by Australian inspectors and could be read- ily corrected. A C&MS foreign programs officer's review of the plant about 21,4 months later, in July, 1970, showed that deficiencies still existed. The plant was delisted at that time, and as of November, 1972 it had not been recerti- fied for exporting to the United States. Un- til it was delisted, the plant remained eligible to export meat products to the United States even though it was not in compliance with U.S. requirements. C&MS records relating to plants in Aus- tralia showed that C&MS had not always re- quired inspection officials to correct promptly certain deficiencies in the Australian inspec- tion system or in approved plants. This episode, which means that Amer- ican consumers ate dirty and possibly un- healthy meat from a dirty packing plant in Australia for months after our people knew about it, in addition to 10 plants they did not know about for months prior to inspection, is only one of scores of known and unknown cases of this kind, and it is only one of a series of instances of official negligence, resulting in dirty and unwholesome meat reaching our con- sumers, which reach right here into this House of Representatives. This House of Representatives has had the laxity of meat inspection called to its attention in the past. I have a bill be- fore it, passed once by the Senate, to re- quire piece-by-piece inspection of meat after it reaches our shores, but it has not been passed, although the evidence piles up that the meat products we are getting from abroad include up to 30 percent from plants which do not meet our in- spection standards. If the filth and carelessness in the Australian plant, which was not delisted, was mainly the result of lax inspection, why did not our inspectors crack down on the Australian inspection system, which our law says must be equivalent to ours? Why was no action taken against the Australian inspector, who allowed the practices described? Why did we not notify the Australian Government to get its inspection in compliance with our re- quirement at once? And when the Congress of the United States knows that this sort of lax inspec- tion of foreign plants is going on, why do we not crack down on the whole busi- ness and take the steps necessary to stop it? We can - get out and pass the bill within days to require piece by piece ex- amination of imported meat after it reaches the United States. The Depart- ment of Agriculture has opposed it, both at Senate hearings, and at House hear- ings. The Senate proceeded to pass the bill, nonetheless. The House did not act on it, and it died. Some of my colleagues felt that the introduction of the bill, the hearings and the attention given the subject then would cause necessary reform exporting; that action which might offend the gov- ernments of the countries exporting dirty meat was unnecessary, and it might cause retaliation against U.S. products. As one industry apologist put it: "Yes, we have to eat their dirty meat so they will eat our dirty stuff." In order to frighten me, he mentioned rat droppings in wheat. In other words, our consumers must eat filthy products so that handlers, processors, and exploiters both here or abroad would not be required to live up to strict standards. If the United States is allowing prod- ucts to be exported from our shores that are dirty, or substandard, we should stop it immediately. And if the standards we have set to reassure our consumers that the food products they are buying and eating are clean, wholesome, and healthful are be- ing ignored abroad, we should crack down without fear, favor, or any further tolerance of officials who seem to think that a little ingesta, a little manure, a few cysts and lesions, a quantity of dirt and trash, and some blood clots, hair, and bones ought to be tolerated, arid that JOHN MELCHER and Senator ABE RIBI- COFF who has repeatedly protested in the Senate ought to keep their mouths shut. Much of this traffic in dirty foreign meat is frozen boneless beef which many consumer groups believe to be sold here at greatly reduced prices to cut the aver- age housewife's grocery bill. Not so. The Provisioner's February 10, 1972, quota- tion for American produced and graded boneless beef was 69% cents as compared to imported bull meat at 66 cents a pound and imported cow meat at 631/2 cents a pound, none of which is graded and less than 1 percent of which is actually U.S. inspected. Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP73600296R000400100021-4 Ap S ? E -.. LL CH ' ASSIFICATION TOF AND BOTTOM . . ' I I s e wAr-Ael? : o s . -zrYpTrir4cT1 . OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP TO NAME AND ADDRESS DATE INITIALS 1 Ex. Dir. -Compt. 2/A3R ....c.- 2 A The Director 4 1472 1/41k P 3 4 5 '''")Y4P