|
NTEU CHAPTER 280 - U.S.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS DESCRIPTION NEWSLETTER CURRENT ISSUES PRESS RELEASES LINKS MEMBERS PAGE HISTORY SITE INDEX
|
|
AN OPEN LETTER TO EPA ADMINISTRATOR CAROL BROWNER CONCERNING DISCRIMINATION AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AT THE EPA The
following statement, authored by Chapter 280 Secretary, Julie Simpson, was
approved by unanimous vote of the Executive Board on October 24, 2000.
The recent messages from Administrator Browner and Deputy Administrator
McCabe reaffirming their commitment to address discrimination at EPA are
welcome. As the representative of professional employees at EPA Headquarters,
the union directs your attention to one of the themes highlighted in these
messages: management training and
accountability.
Federal law requires personnel practices in the federal government to be
based on merit principles such as recruitment and advancement on the basis of
knowledge, skills, and abilities; non‑discrimination; equal pay for equal
work; dedication to the public interest; accountability for performance; and
employee development through training and education.
EPA must rededicate itself to these principles at all levels of
management. It is our experience
that managers can and do make decisions based not on merit principles but on
their own preferences and biases. There
is little or no training for new managers in the merit system or personnel rules
and policies. Managers do not
seem to be evaluated on their supervisory skills, and they too often are not
held accountable for their treatment of their employees. In fact, managers with records of discrimination continue to
advance in their careers. This
creates a climate where anything goes. A
climate where anything goes is a climate in which discrimination can flourish.
Because so many managers lack fundamental supervisory skills, what may
start out as a legitimate need to discuss or correct an employee's performance
often is handled so badly that the employee only knows action is being taken
against them or their job is being subtly adversely affected. They do not know why. Some
employees are poor performers. But
it is management's obligation to explain to them how their performance needs to
improve and to give them a chance to correct it.
All too often, this doesn't happen.
Instead, the manager marginalizes or avoids the employee.
This creates a climate where the employee may suspect discrimination
because they know of no other reason why their career is being hurt.
When incidents of behavior that may be discriminatory do arise, many
managers lack the skills or the will to address them directly. We therefore often see the following responses:
Avoidance. If
I ignore a problem, it doesn't exist.
Denial. If I
can't ignore it, I can still deny that a real problem exists.
Blame‑shifting.
Even if a problem does exist, I'm not the one who is responsible
for resolving it.
Intimidation. You
had better not continue to insist there is a problem.
Character assassination.
You are continuing to insist there is a problem, but your saying so doesn't have to be taken seriously because you are
just a problem employee with no credibility.
Retaliation. Because
you continue to insist there is a problem, you are not a team player and will be treated accordingly.
These responses do not address the question of whether discrimination has in
fact occurred. They are defensive tactics designed to protect the manager,
often at the expense of the employee. The
cost to employees of pointing out instances of discrimination therefore can be
enormous. An employee will rarely
do so unless they believe they have nothing left to lose. This is the basis for the widespread perception that an
employee who is legitimately the victim of discrimination can rarely say so
without damaging or ending their career, but a manager who in fact discriminates
generally suffers no adverse consequences.
The remedies available to employees are too often ineffective.
It can take years to get a civil rights case through the system.
In addition, the Office of Civil Rights itself has a history of
discrimination claims brought by its own staff.
Many employees are therefore reluctant to file an EEO complaint because
they are not confident that their rights will be protected.
Chapter 280 urges you and all of EPA’s leadership to look beyond
numbers of women, minorities, and people with disabilities. No matter what their
race, ethnicity, gender, or disability status, a poorly‑trained,
inexperienced and under‑supervised manager is no asset to the Agency. Creating diversity doesn't prevent discrimination. EPA must reaffirm its commitment to merit principles and management accountability at all levels of the Agency. |