Title: EEOC's Investigation Obligations and Historical Context
Written on
Fact: Section 2000e-5(b) assigns the EEOC an “unconditional and mandatory” obligation to conduct investigations.
- The New York EEOC failed to address my numerous complaints.
- The New York EEOC did not modify my initial complaint.
- The New York EEOC did not conduct interviews with me or my witnesses.
Howard M. Wexler, who represents Verizon, is affiliated with Seyfarth Shaw, while Victoria A. Lipnic, the Acting Chair of the EEOC, also has ties to Seyfarth Shaw.
EEOC Case Dumping Scandal (1965 — Tim)
Tim: The thief! It’s the thief! Stop thief! Stop thief!
In other words:
Fact: I submitted 10 faxes and 7 overnight deliveries, totaling 500 pages, to the NY EEOC.
Fact: I provided my degree and Next Step Certificate to the NY EEOC on two occasions, demonstrating my qualifications for various positions at Verizon.
On July 10, 2015, I filed a formal complaint with the EEOC Director of the Office of Field Management, but received no response.
I also lodged three written complaints with the EEOC Office of Inspector General regarding the NY EEOC and the Office of Field Management, yet received no acknowledgment.
The NY EEOC issued me a ‘no reasonable cause’ determination.
Q: Why have over a million American women received ‘no reasonable cause’ letters from the EEOC since 1965? A: No answer.
In 1974, Nixon left office with 2,416 EEOC employees, while Obama departed in 2017 with 2,202 staff members.
Q: Did Bush and Obama intentionally underfund and understaff the EEOC for 16 years? A: The question remains.
“I am my sister’s keeper.”
Our husbands did what? They underfunded and understaffed the EEOC for 50 years.
Fact: Section 2000e-5(b) mandates the EEOC to investigate complaints, yet numerous issues persist.