Discrimination Complaint Log Evaluation Phase I Pir Ahmad USDOL - Civil Rights Center

Scope of Analysis A Three year longitudinal study A Three year longitudinal study Purpose: An informational tool to assist the Civil Rights Center with its compliance assistance efforts and monitoring activities. To provide feedback to the State Workforce Agencies and their recipients and USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers. Purpose: An informational tool to assist the Civil Rights Center with its compliance assistance efforts and monitoring activities. To provide feedback to the State Workforce Agencies and their recipients and USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers.

Scope of Analysis Examine the complaint activity of recipients nationwide under Title I WIA, Wagner-Peyser, Unemployment Insurance, and against USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers Examine the complaint activity of recipients nationwide under Title I WIA, Wagner-Peyser, Unemployment Insurance, and against USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers Demographic analysis of the population filing complaints of discrimination, along with the bases and issues of complaints Demographic analysis of the population filing complaints of discrimination, along with the bases and issues of complaints

Scope of Analysis Identifying and examining the complaint activity related to and from persons with disabilities Identifying and examining the complaint activity related to and from persons with disabilities Conducting process-based evaluations into the complaint processing procedures Conducting process-based evaluations into the complaint processing procedures Developing performance measures Developing performance measures Trend Analysis Trend Analysis

Phase I I. Data Submission –State Workforce Agencies and Their Recipients –USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers II. Complaint Activity –Complaint Filers –Persons with Disabilities

Phase I III. Complaint Processing Performance –Alternative Dispute Resolution –Complaint Outcomes –Non-jurisdictional Complaints IV. Recap

Regional Distribution Midwest Region: Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas Midwest Region: Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas Southeast Region: Alabama, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, U.S. Virgin Islands, Virginia, and West Virginia Southeast Region: Alabama, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, U.S. Virgin Islands, Virginia, and West Virginia West Region: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming West Region: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming Northeast Region: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin Northeast Region: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin

I. Data Submission A. State Workforce Agencies and Their Recipients B. USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers

Data Submission Program Demographic Data Program Demographic Data –Challenges encountered: A number of State Workforce Agencies experienced problems with aggregation and allocation of multiple race responses of program participants. –Data inadequacies: Especially for UI data, precluded the inclusion of program demographic data in this phase of the study

State Workforce Agencies – FY03 Complaint Log Submission MidwestSoutheastWestNortheastTotal Number of States in Region Number of States Submitting Complaints Total, Complaints Submitted

USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers MidwestSoutheastWestNortheast U.S. Totals Job Corps Centers Centers Submitting Complaints Total Complaints Submitted Student Population 23,21029,77620,42721,56294,975 Number of Complaints/1,000 Students

II. Complaint Activity A. Complaint Filers B. Persons with Disabilities

Complaint Filers

Persons with Disabilities Filed 137 complaints alleging discrimination Filed 137 complaints alleging discrimination Disabled employees of State Workforce Agencies accounted for 56% of all disability complaints Disabled employees of State Workforce Agencies accounted for 56% of all disability complaints Disability complaints occurred most often in the Midwest – accounting for 41% Disability complaints occurred most often in the Midwest – accounting for 41% Job Corps received only four complaints alleging discrimination on the bases of disability Job Corps received only four complaints alleging discrimination on the bases of disability

III. Complaint Processing Performance A. Alternative Dispute Resolution B. Complaint Outcomes C. Non-jurisdictional Complaints

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In FY03 ADR utilization ranged from a low of 3% of complaints in the Midwest to a high of 9% in the West. In FY03 ADR utilization ranged from a low of 3% of complaints in the Midwest to a high of 9% in the West. 57 complaints were resolved utilizing an ADR process 57 complaints were resolved utilizing an ADR process ADR participation rates ADR participation rates –WIA participants 13% –Employees 6% –Customers 5%

Complaint Outcomes

Non-Jurisdictional Complaints 453 complaints or 37% of all FY03 complaints classified as non-jurisdictional 453 complaints or 37% of all FY03 complaints classified as non-jurisdictional Majority filed under the bases of sex, race, and disability Majority filed under the bases of sex, race, and disability Over half of the complaints classified as non-jurisdictional were filed by employees Over half of the complaints classified as non-jurisdictional were filed by employees 45% of all complaints alleging discrimination on the bases of disability were classified as non-jurisdictional 45% of all complaints alleging discrimination on the bases of disability were classified as non-jurisdictional

Recap Nationwide 1,211 complaints alleging discrimination were filed in FY03 Nationwide 1,211 complaints alleging discrimination were filed in FY03 Employees filed 551 complaints or 45% of all complaints. On the bases of sex, predominately female, and race, mostly Black. 43% of these complaints were classified as non-jurisdictional. Employees filed 551 complaints or 45% of all complaints. On the bases of sex, predominately female, and race, mostly Black. 43% of these complaints were classified as non-jurisdictional.

Recap - continue Job Corps students filed 190 complaints alleging discrimination, with 117 or 62% being filed by female students. The main issue – harassment, whether sexual or verbal, or simply living in a hostile environment. Job Corps students filed 190 complaints alleging discrimination, with 117 or 62% being filed by female students. The main issue – harassment, whether sexual or verbal, or simply living in a hostile environment. Female students were five times as likely to file a complaint alleging sexual harassment than their male counterpart. Female students were five times as likely to file a complaint alleging sexual harassment than their male counterpart.

Recap - continue Persons with disabilities filed 137 complaints, accounting for 11% of all complaints filed in FY03. Persons with disabilities filed 137 complaints, accounting for 11% of all complaints filed in FY03. Disabled employees of State Workforce Agencies and their local areas filed 56% of all disability discrimination complaints. Disabled employees of State Workforce Agencies and their local areas filed 56% of all disability discrimination complaints. Complaint issues – wrongful termination and failure to provide reasonable accommodation. Complaint issues – wrongful termination and failure to provide reasonable accommodation.

Recap - continue ADR utilization ranged from a low of 3% to a high of 9% of all complaints filed in FY03. ADR utilization ranged from a low of 3% to a high of 9% of all complaints filed in FY03. WIA participants had the highest ADR participation rates at 13%. WIA participants had the highest ADR participation rates at 13%. Complaint Processing Times: Complaint Processing Times: –Average 29 days

Recap High incidence of classifying discrimination complaints as non-jurisdictional – 37% High incidence of classifying discrimination complaints as non-jurisdictional – 37% –Midwest Region; 60% Majority of these complaints were filed by employees, under the prohibited bases of sex, race, and disability. Majority of these complaints were filed by employees, under the prohibited bases of sex, race, and disability.