COURT VIEWS EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACT BROADLY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• 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
• Publication Date: May 14, 1974
• Content Type: NSPR

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 "i`oilho
---..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-,.
sent`i'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.
IliarcA`2, 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