Table 2-2

Distribution of Discrimination Charges by Region: Fiscal Years 1970-19681

1 Data include only charges for which probable EEOC jurisdiction exists.

2

The South is defined as the eleven states of the Confederacy plus Kentucky and Oklahoma. 3 The North represents all Non-South states and possessions east of the Mississippi River.

Source: U.S. EEOC Third, Fourth, and Fifth Annual Reports

settled by such agencies. Currently, one out of five charges received

by the EEOC is so deferred.

Another factor generating racial charges

from the South is that approximately one-half of the nation's blacks live

and work there.7/

The regional concentration of blacks and their aware

ness of employment discrimination contributes heavily to the number of

charges.

If charges can be used as a guide, the kind of discrimination which respondents are alleged to have committed varies according to the basis of discrimination (see Table 2-3). Among employers, discrimination on the basis of race or national origin most often takes the form of discriminatory hiring, discharge, or job classification systems. However, discrimination on the basis of sex is practiced primarily through unequal compensation, less advantageous terms of employment, and lower job classification. Discrimination by employers on the basis of religion is usually effectuated through hiring and discharge practices.

Racial discrimination by unions takes varied forms. It may be a result of discriminatory referrals, differentiated seniority systems, or inadequate representation, all of which may be followed by exclusionary policies and support of inequitable job classification systems. Incidentally, these same patterns hold for union discrimination on the basis of national origin, sex, or religion. Racial or national origin charges in which unions are joined by management as co-respondents usually cite denial of equal access to training and retraining programs.

Discriminatory referral policies comprise the most frequently used means of discrimination on the basis of race and religion by both public and private employment agencies. Discriminatory testing joins these in importance where sex and national origion are concerned. Where all three-

employer, union, and employment agency--are charged as respondents, discrimination usually is characterized as retaliation against the complainant.

Retaliation is joined by discriminatory advertising where sex is involved

as a basis of discrimination.

Administration of Compliance

When the Commission began receiving complaints in July, 1965, it used the techniques of investigation and settlement employed by other federal regulatory agencies. Under these procedures, a charge was filed, analyzed, and investigated. An elaborate investigative report was prepared, reviewed, and approved by the Commission's Regional Director, and transmitted to headquarters in Washington.

to the Division of Decisions and Interpretations.

The case was then assigned

There a decision stating

whether reasonable cause existed to believe the charge of discrimination was true was drafted, and the case sent on to the Commissioners for their study and approval. Those cases in which the Commissioners found "reasonable cause" were returned to the Regional Office and assigned to

field personnel who attempted to resolve the matter by conciliation.8/

Following this procedure, the Commission found itself, at the end of calendar year 1969, with a growing backlog of cases and was forced to take steps in January, 1970, to streamline the compliance process by using the pre-decision settlement. Under the new procedure the final investigation report was replaced by the Regional Director's Finding of Fact (FOF), which was issued to the charging party and respondent immediately after investigation.

The parties were then offered an opportunity to resolve the conflict in a settlement agreement. If a settlement was reached, the