THE ASSOCIATION FOR T
CIVIL LIBERTIES (AACL)
DENOUNCES DISCRIMINA
OF GENDER, RACIAL BAC
ORIENTATION, NATIONA
AFFILIATION AND/OR DI
Be well. Take care. Keep yourselves
W (AACL)
Michael A. Ayele
Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist
Audio-Visual Media Analyst
Anti-Propaganda Journalist
THE ADVANCEMENT OF
UNEQUIVOCALLY
ATION OF THE BASES
CKGROUND, SEXUAL
AL ORIGIN, RELIGIOUS
ISABILITY.
at arms distance.
DMH Workforce Diversity Profile
Oct‐21
Name of Department: Department of Mental Health
Total Number of Employees: 5276 Male Female Unknown % Female
22 71.41%
1502 3752 % Minority
Unknown 35.35%
White Black Hispanic Asian Am. Indian P. Islander Two or More 49
3379 1645 66 98 7 2 30
Male/Female Am. Indian Two or Unknown
0% More 1%
0% 1%
29% Asian White
2% 64%
71%
P. Islander
Male Female Unknown 0%
Hispanic
1%
Black
31%
Racial Breakdown
Version: FY21
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Office of Legal Counsel Washington, D. C. 20507
Free: (833) 827-2920
TTY: (202) 663-6056
FAX: (202) 663-7026
Website: www.eeoc.gov
12/20/2021
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele (aka) W
Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-002911
Dear Mr. Ayele:
Your request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, received by the Office of Legal
Counsel on 12/20/2021, is assigned to the [X] Simple [ ] Complex [ ] Expedited track with the above FOIA number.
Your request will be processed by Government Information Specialist Joanne Murray who can be reached at (202)
921-2541.
[X] EEOC will make every effort to issue a determination on your request on or before 01/19/2022. FOIA and
EEOC regulations provide 20 working days to issue a determination on a request, not including Saturdays,
Sundays and federal holidays. In unusual circumstances, EEOC may extend the 20 working days by
10 additional working days or stop processing your request until you respond to our request for fee or
clarifying information. Should EEOC take an extension or stop processing your request, notice will be
issued prior to the expiration of the 20 working days.
[X] the need to search for and collect the requested records, if any exist, from field offices or
other establishments that are separate from this office;
You may contact the FOIA Requester Service Center for status updates on your FOIA request or for FOIA
information via toll free at (833) 827-2920, to our non-toll free number at (202) 921-2542, by e-mail to
[email protected], by facsimile to (202) 653-6034, or by mail to our office address in the letterhead above.
Additionally, if your request was filed online through the EEOC FOIA Web Portal, you may monitor its
status at https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login. You may also contact the EEOC FOIA Public Liaison,
Stephanie D. Garner, for assistance.
Sincerely,
Dister Battle for
_____________________________
Stephanie D. Garner
Assistant Legal Counsel
[email protected]
Endnotes
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Office of Legal Counsel Washington, D. C. 20507
Free: (833) 827-2920
01/18/2022 TTY: (202) 663-6056
FAX: (202) 663-7026
Website: www.eeoc.gov
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele (aka) W
Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-002911
Workshare agreement between EEOC and MCHR
Dear Mr. Ayele (aka) W:
This letter is in response to your request or appeal under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), received by
our office on 12/20/2021. As provided in U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(B) (2007), we hereby provide you with the required
written notice that we are extending by ten (10) working days the time in which we shall respond. Such extension is
necessary because of the following “unusual circumstances”:
[X] (i) the need to search for and collect the requested records, if any exist, from field offices
or other establishments that are separate from this office.
[X] If you have any questions or wish to discuss reformulation or an alternative time frame for
the processing of your request, you may contact Joanne Murray, the FOIA Professional handling your
request, at (202) 921-2541. Additionally, you may contact the Office of Government Information Services
(OGIS) at the National Archives and Records Administration to inquire about the FOIA mediation services
they offer. The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services,
National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland
20740-6001; email at [email protected]; telephone at (202) 741-5770; toll free (877) 684-6448; or facsimile at
(202) 741-5769.
We will make every attempt to respond to your request by 02/02/2022.
Sincerely,
/ Joanne Murray / for
_____________________________
Michael L. Heise
Acting Assistant Legal Counsel
[email protected]
820-2022-002911
Endnotes
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Washington, D. C. 20507
Office of Legal Counsel
Free: (833) 827-2920
ASL: (844) 234-5122
FAX: (202) 827-7545
Website: www.eeoc.gov
February 3, 2022
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele (aka) W
ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CIVIL LIBERTIES
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-002911
Information with regards to DMH and MCHR
Dear Mr. Ayele (aka) W:
Your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, received on 12/19/2021, is processed. The initial due
date was extended by 10-business days per our correspondence dated 01/18/2022. Our search began on
1/19/2022. All agency records in creation as of 12/20/2021 are within the scope of EEOC’s search for
responsive records. The paragraph(s) checked below apply.
[X] Portions of your request are as follows:
[X] Granted.
[X] Denied pursuant to the subsections of the FOIA indicated at the end of this letter. An
attachment to this letter explains the use of these exemptions in more detail; and
[X] Procedurally denied as no records fitting the description of the records you seek disclosed
exist or could be located after a thorough search. See the Comments page for further
explanation.
[X] The disclosed records, 7 pages in total, are available via EEOC’s FOIA Web Portal. See the
following link: https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login.. No fee is charged because the cost of
collecting and processing the chargeable fee equals or exceeds the amount of the fee. 29 C.F.R.
§ 1610.15(d).
[X] I trust that the furnished information fully satisfies your request. If you need any further assistance
or would like to discuss any aspect of your request, please do not hesitate to contact the FOIA
Professional who processed your request or our FOIA Public Liaison (see contact information in
above letterhead or under signature line).
[X] You may contact the Acting EEOC FOIA Public Liaison Michael L. Heise for further assistance or
to discuss any aspect of your request. In addition, you may contact the Office of Government
Information Services (OGIS) to inquire about the FOIA mediation services they offer.
The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National
Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-
6001, email at [email protected]; telephone at (202) 741-5770; toll free 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile
at (202) 741-5769.
820-2022-002911
The contact information for the FOIA Public Liaison is as follows: Michael L. Heise, EEOC FOIA
Public Liaison, Office of Legal Counsel, FOIA Division, Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, 131 M. Street, N.E., Fifth Floor, Washington, D.C. 20507, email to [email protected],
telephone at (202) 921-2542; or fax at (202) 827-7545.
[X] If you are not satisfied with the response to this request, you may administratively appeal in
writing. Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted in 90 days from receipt of
this letter to the Office of Legal Counsel, FOIA Division, Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, 131 M Street, NE, 5NW02E, Washington, D.C. 20507, email to [email protected];
online at https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login, or fax at (202) 827-7545. Your appeal will be
governed by 29 C.F.R. § 1610.11.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Heise
Assistant Legal Counsel (Acting)
[email protected]
Applicable Sections of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b):
Exemption(s) Used:
[X] (3)(A)(i) [X] (7)(C)
[X] Section 706(b) of Title VII
[X] Section 709(e) of Title VII
[X] Section 107 of the ADA
[X] Section 207 of the GINA
Exemption 3 to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i) (2016), as amended by
the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538, states that disclosure is not required
for a matter specifically exempted from disclosure by statute if that statute:
(A)(i) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no
discretion on the issue[.]
Sections 706(b) and 709(e) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(b), 2000e-
8(e)(2006), are part of such a statute. Section 706(b) provides that:
Charges shall not be made public by the Commission . . . . Nothing said or done during
and as a part of [the Commission's informal endeavors at resolving charges of
discrimination] may be made public . . . .
Section 709(e) of Title VII provides:
It shall be unlawful for any officer of the Commission to make public in any manner
whatever any information obtained by the Commission pursuant to its authority under this
section [to investigate charges of discrimination and to require employers to maintain and
submit records] prior to the institution of any proceeding under this title involving such
information.
2|P a g e
820-2022-002911
Section 107 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and § 207 of the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) adopt the procedures of Sections 706 and 709 of Title VII. See EEOC v.
Associated Dry Goods Co., 449 U.S. 590 (1981); Frito-Lay v. EEOC, 964 F. Supp. 236, 239-43 (W.D. Ky.
1997); American Centennial Insurance Co. v. EEOC, 722 F. Supp. 180 (D.N.J. 1989); and EEOC v. City of
Milwaukee, 54 F. Supp. 2d 885, 893 (E.D. Wis. 1999).
INFORMATION WITHHELD PURSUANT TO THE THIRD EXEMPTION TO THE FOIA:
EEOC can neither confirm nor deny the existence, or non-existence, of any Title VII, ADA, and/or
GINA, charges filed by an individual against an entity to which you are not, or do not represent, a
party to the charge.
Exemption (b)(7)(C) to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C), as amended by the
FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538, authorizes the Commission to withhold:
records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that
the production of such law enforcement records or information . . . (C) could reasonably be
expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy . . . .
The seventh exemption applies to civil and criminal investigations conducted by regulatory agencies.
Abraham & Rose, P.L.C. v. United States, 138 F.3d 1075, 1083 (6th Cir. 1998). Release of statements and
identities of witnesses and subjects of an investigation creates the potential for witness intimidation that
could deter their cooperation. National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire and Rubber Co., 437 U.S.
214, 239 (1978); Manna v. United States Dep’t. of Justice, 51 F.3d 1158,1164 (3d Cir. 1995). Disclosure of
identities of employee-witnesses could cause "problems at their jobs and with their livelihoods." L&C
Marine Transport, Ltd. v. United States, 740 F.2d 919, 923 (11th Cir. 1984). The Supreme Court has
explained that only "[o]fficial information that sheds light on an agency's performance of its statutory duties"
merits disclosure under FOIA, and noted that "disclosure of information about private citizens that is
accumulated in various governmental files" would "reveal little or nothing about an agency's own conduct."
United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 773 (1989).
For the purposes of determining what constitutes an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under
exemption (b)(7)(C), the term “personal privacy” only encompasses individuals, and does not extend to the
privacy interests of corporations. FCC v. AT&T Inc., 131 S.Ct. 1177, 1178 (2011).
INFORMATION WITHHELD PURSUANT TO THE SEVENTH EXEMPTION TO THE FOIA:
EEOC cannot grant access to ADEA or EPA charges, filed by an individual against an entity, in order
to prevent an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy by a third party.
COMMENTS
This office’s response to your request is as follows:
(1) Your request for “formal and informal ties existing between the DMH, the Missouri Commission on
Human Rights (MCHR), the EEOC, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Centers
for Medicaid & Medicare Services (CMS), and the Joint Commission,” is granted.
Charges filed with a Fair Employment Practices Agency (FEPA), such as MCHR, that has a
worksharing agreement with the EEOC, and the allegation(s) are covered by a law enforced by the
EEOC, the FEPA will dual file the charge with EEOC. If a charge is filed with EEOC, and the charge
is covered by state or local law, EEOC dual files the charge with the state or local FEPA. See the
following link: https://www.eeoc.gov/fair-employment-practices-agencies-fepas-and-dual-filing.
The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, by an employer; such as
a state or local government, against a job applicant or an employee. The requested information is
3|P a g e
820-2022-002911
already available online, via EEOC’s public website. See the following link:
https://www.eeoc.gov/employers.
The EEOC provides leadership and guidance to federal agencies on all aspects of the federal
government's equal employment opportunity program. The requested information is already
available online, via EEOC’s public website. See the following link: https://www.eeoc.gov/federal-
sector.
(2) Your request for “the paper copies of complaints filed with the EEOC/MCHR, which led to the DMH
engaging in mediation sessions,” is denied pursuant to the third and seventh exemptions to
the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(3)(A)(i) and (b)(7)(C).
The confidentiality provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the ADA, and GINA prohibit the
EEOC from confirming or denying the existence, or nonexistence, of a charge brought by an
individual to a third party of the charge. The third exemption to the FOIA exempts this information
from disclosure.
The seventh exemption to the FOIA permits the agency to withhold information compiled in
investigative files where disclosure of such information could result in an unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy. In this instance, we cannot grant access to, or copies of, any ADEA and EPA
charges. 29 C.F.R. § 1610.17(g).
(3) Your request for “the paper copies of complaints filed with the EEOC/MCHR, which led to the DMH
not engaging in mediation sessions,” is denied pursuant to the third and seventh exemptions
to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(3)(A)(i) and (b)(7)(C). See #2 above.
(4) Your request for “the name(s), the academic background(s), and the professional
responsibility(ies), of employee(s) legally representing the DMH in charges of employment
discrimination dually filed with the EEOC and the MCHR” is procedurally denied. No records exist
within the EEOC.
(5) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence
between the EEOC and the DMH legal representative in circumstances where current/former
employees havefiled a charge of employment discrimination pursuant to Title VII of the 1964 and
1991 Civil Rights Act” is denied pursuant to the third and seventh exemptions to the FOIA. 5
U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(3)(A)(i) and (b)(7)(C). See #2 above.
(6) Your request for “documents outlining the obligations of the DMH to inform the HHS (CMS) and/or
the Joint Commission about a charge of employment discrimination dually filed with the EEOC and
the MCHR” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
The records you seek, if any exist, would have originated with the following agency. This portion
of your request should be sent directly to:
CMS FOIA Office Service Center
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: (410) 786-5353
Fax: (443) 380-7260
The above FOIA information was found via CMS’s public website at the following link:
https://www.cms.gov/Center/freedom-of-information-act-center.html.
(7) Your request for “the outcomes of the charges of employment discrimination filed withthe EEOC by
current/former employees of the DMH” is denied pursuant to the third and seventh exemptions
to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(3)(A)(i) and (b)(7)(C). See #2 above.
4|P a g e
820-2022-002911
(8) Your request for “statistics outlining the number of people who continue to work for the DMH
following [his/her] charge of employment discrimination filed with the EEOC and the MCHR” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(9) Your request for “the memorandum of agreement (MOA) and/or memorandum of understanding
(MOU) concluded between the EEOC and the MCHR in the processing of employment
discrimination charges filed pursuant to Title VII of the 1964 and 1991 Civil Rights Act” is granted.
Please find the initial worksharing agreement, along with the extension, via EEOC’s FOIA Web
Portal.
This response was prepared by Joanne Murray, Government Information Specialist, who may be reached
at (202) 921-2541.
5|P a g e
FY 2022 EXTENSION OF WORK.SHARING AGREEMENT
Inasmuch as there have been no substantive changes in the processes, procedures, statutes,
policies or regulations that would adversely affect or substantially alter the work sharing
arrangement between the St. Louis District Office and the
Missouri Commission on Human Rights, or that would affect the processing of charges
filed under the pertinent Federal, state or local statutes, the parties agree to extend the
current work sharing agreement that was executed on October 2, 2019, through the FY
2022 Charge Resolution Contract Option Period, from October I, 2021 through September
30, 2022. The agencies agree to work together in furtherance ofthe provisions ofEEOC's
current Strategic Plan when assessing the allocation of charges under this agreement and
to cooperate in compliance and enforcement efforts as well as training, outreach and
technical assistance efforts encompassed by the Plan. This agreement, as well as the
attendant Worksharing Agreement may be reopened and amended by mutual consent of
the parties.
tw~ 10/27/21- - - -
Date
Executive Director
Missouri Commission on Human Rights
Lloyd J. Vasquez, Jr. Date
District Director
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
St. Louis District Office
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Office of Legal Counsel Washington, D. C. 20507
Free: (833) 827-2920
TTY: (202) 663-6056
FAX: (202) 827-7545
Website: www.eeoc.gov
03/08/2022
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele
Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-005864
Dear Mr. Ayele:
Your request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, received by the Office of Legal
Counsel on 03/08/2022, is assigned to the [X] Simple [ ] Complex [ ] Expedited track with the above FOIA number.
Your request will be processed by Government Information Specialist Joanne Murray who can be reached at (202)
921-2541.
[X] EEOC will make every effort to issue a determination on your request on or before 04/04/2022. FOIA and
EEOC regulations provide 20 working days to issue a determination on a request, not including Saturdays,
Sundays and federal holidays. In unusual circumstances, EEOC may extend the 20 working days by
10 additional working days or stop processing your request until you respond to our request for fee or
clarifying information. Should EEOC take an extension or stop processing your request, notice will be
issued prior to the expiration of the 20 working days.
You may contact the FOIA Requester Service Center for status updates on your FOIA request or for FOIA
information via toll free at (833) 827-2920, to our non-toll free number at (202) 921-2542, by e-mail to
[email protected], by facsimile to (202) 653-6034, or by mail to our office address in the letterhead above.
Additionally, if your request was filed online through the EEOC FOIA Web Portal, you may monitor its
status at https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login. You may also contact the Acting EEOC FOIA Public
Liaison, Michael L. Heise, for assistance.
Sincerely,
Dister Battle for
_____________________________
Michael L. Heise
Acting Assistant Legal Counsel
[email protected]
Endnotes
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Washington, D. C. 20507
Office of Legal Counsel
Free: (833) 827-2920
04/01/2022 ASL: (844) 234-5122
FAX: (202) 827-7545
Website: www.eeoc.gov
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele (aka) W
Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-005864
Policies on relationships and conflict of interest in the workplace
Information for career advancement, training, and education
Dear Mr. Ayele (aka) W:
This letter is in response to your request or appeal under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),
received by our office on 03/08/2022. As provided in U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(B) (2007), we hereby
provide you with the required written notice that we are extending by ten (10) working days the
time in which we shall respond. Such extension is necessary because of the following “unusual
circumstances”:
[X] (i) the need to search for and collect the requested records, if any exist, from field offices
or other establishments that are separate from this office.
[X] If you have any questions or wish to discuss reformulation or an alternative time frame for
the processing of your request, you may contact Joanne Murray, the FOIA Professional
handling your request, at (202) 921-2541. Additionally, you may contact the Office of
Government Information Services (OGIS) at the National Archives and Records
Administration to inquire about the FOIA mediation services they offer. The contact
information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National
Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland
20740-6001; email at [email protected]; telephone at (202) 741-5770; toll free (877) 684-
6448; or facsimile at (202) 741-5769.
We will make every attempt to respond to your request by 04/18/2022.
Sincerely,
/ Joanne Murray / for
_____________________________
Michael L. Heise
Acting Assistant Legal Counsel
[email protected]
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Washington, D. C. 20507
Office of Legal Counsel
Free: (877) 869-1802
April 26, 2022 ASL: (844) 234-5122
FAX: (202) 827-7545
Website: www.eeoc.gov
VIA: [email protected]
Mr. Michael Ayele (aka) W
Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA 10013
Re: EEOC FOIA No.: 820-2022-005864
Documents outlining opportunities for career advancement
Dear Mr. Ayele (aka) W:
This letter notifies you that additional information is needed from you to complete the processing your
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, received in this office on 03/08/2022. Request item
enumerated below states the following:
“[40] The documents outlining the opportunities offered to employees of your
city/county/state/federal government to grow and earn a promotion within your
organizational unit.”
Your request identified above is not reasonably described. The request is too broad for this Agency to
conduct a reasonable search for records responsive.
At this time, our office is requesting the following additional clarifying information in order to search for
records responsive to item #40:
i. Provide the name of each of the office(s) or division(s) within the Commission, if known;
ii. Provide position titles, or a description for each position, to align with your request; and
iii. Confirm the information sought will contain only the most recent opportunities offered in each
position.
The 20 working days provided in the FOIA to respond to your request stop from the date of this letter until
the date this office receives your written response. 5 U.S.C. § 552(6)(A)(ii)(I-II) and 29 C.F.R. § 1610.9(g).
To resume processing your request as quickly as possible, you will need to submit a written response to
our request for information or clarification within ten (10) business days of your receipt of this letter. When
EEOC receives your response processing of your request will resume.
Please direct your written response to my attention at the address provided above or via email at
[email protected]. Failure to respond to this office may result in an administrative withdrawal of item #40
of your request.
Thank you for your attention to our above request.
820-2022-005864
Sincerely,
/ Joanne Murray / for
__________________________
Michael L. Heise
Acting Assistant Legal Counsel
[email protected]
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Office of Legal Counsel Washington, D. C. 20507
Free: (833) 827-2920
ASL: (844) 234-5122
FAX: (202) 827-7545
Website: www.eeoc.gov
May 9, 2022
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele (aka) W
ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CIVIL LIBERTIES
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-005864
Policies on relationships and conflict of interest in the workplace
Information for career advancement, training, and education
Dear Mr. Ayele (aka) W:
Your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, received on 03/08/2022, is processed. Our search began
on 03/18/2022. The initial due date was extended by 10-business days per our letter of acknowledgment
dated 04/01/2022. All agency records in creation as of 03/08/2022 are within the scope of EEOC’s search
for responsive records. The paragraph(s) checked below apply.
[X] Portions of your request are as follows:
[X] Granted;
[X] Denied pursuant to the subsection(s) of the FOIA indicated at the end of this letter. An
attachment to this letter explains the use of these exemptions in more detail; and
[X] Procedurally denied as [X] no records fitting the description of the records you seek
disclosed exist or could be located after a thorough search and [X] your request is not
reasonably described. See comments below for further explanation.
[X] The disclosed record, 1 document, totaling 4 pages, is available via EEOC’s FOIA Web Portal. See
the following link: https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login. No fee is charged because the cost
of collecting and processing the chargeable fee equals or exceeds the amount of the fee. 29 C.F.R.
§ 1610.15(d).
[X] I trust that the furnished information fully satisfies your request. If you need any further assistance
or would like to discuss any aspect of your request, please do not hesitate to contact the FOIA
Professional who processed your request or our FOIA Public Liaison (see contact information in
above letterhead or under signature line).
[X] You may contact the Acting EEOC FOIA Public Liaison Michael L. Heise for further assistance or
to discuss any aspect of your request. In addition, you may contact the Office of Government
Information Services (OGIS) to inquire about the FOIA mediation services they offer.
The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National
Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-
6001, email at [email protected]; telephone at (202) 741-5770; toll free 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile
at (202) 741-5769.
820-2022-005864
The contact information for the FOIA Public Liaison is as follows: Michael L. Heise, EEOC FOIA
Public Liaison, Office of Legal Counsel, FOIA Division, Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, 131 M. Street, N.E., Fifth Floor, Washington, D.C. 20507, email to [email protected],
telephone at (202) 921-2542; or fax at (202) 827-7545.
[X] If you are not satisfied with the response to this request, you may administratively appeal in writing.
Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted in 90 days from receipt of this letter
to the Office of Legal Counsel, FOIA Division, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 131 M
Street, NE, 5NW02E, Washington, D.C. 20507, email to [email protected]; online at
https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login, or fax at (202) 827-7545. Your appeal will be governed
by 29 C.F.R. § 1610.11.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Heise
Assistant Legal Counsel (Acting)
[email protected]
Applicable Sections of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b):
Exemption(s) Used:
[X] (b)(3)(A)(i) [X] (b)(7)(C)
[X] § 706(b)
[X] § 709(e)
[X] § 107 of the ADA
[X] § 207 of the GINA
(b)(3)(A)(i)
Exemption 3 to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i) (2016), as amended by
the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538, states that disclosure is not required
for a matter specifically exempted from disclosure by statute if that statute:
(A)(i) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no
discretion on the issue[.]
Sections 706(b) and 709(e) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(b), 2000e-
8(e)(2006), are part of such a statute. Section 706(b) provides that:
Charges shall not be made public by the Commission . . . . Nothing said or done during
and as a part of [the Commission's informal endeavors at resolving charges of
discrimination] may be made public . . . .
Section 709(e) of Title VII provides:
It shall be unlawful for any officer of the Commission to make public in any manner
whatever any information obtained by the Commission pursuant to its authority under this
section [to investigate charges of discrimination and to require employers to maintain and
submit records] prior to the institution of any proceeding under this title involving such
information.
820-2022-005864
Section 107 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and § 207 of the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) adopt the procedures of Sections 706 and 709 of Title VII. See EEOC v.
Associated Dry Goods Co., 449 U.S. 590 (1981); Frito-Lay v. EEOC, 964 F. Supp. 236, 239-43 (W.D. Ky.
1997); American Centennial Insurance Co. v. EEOC, 722 F. Supp. 180 (D.N.J. 1989); and EEOC v. City of
Milwaukee, 54 F. Supp. 2d 885, 893 (E.D. Wis. 1999).
INFORMATION WITHHELD PURSUANT TO THE THIRD EXEMPTION TO THE FOIA:
Access to investigative files, to include correspondence, in which the issuance of your right
to sue has long since expired; Charge Nos. 28E-2014-00485 and 28E-2014-01070.
(b)(7)(C)
Exemption (b)(7)(C) to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C), as amended by the
FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538, authorizes the Commission to withhold:
records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that
the production of such law enforcement records or information . . . (C) could reasonably be
expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy . . . .
The seventh exemption applies to civil and criminal investigations conducted by regulatory agencies.
Abraham & Rose, P.L.C. v. United States, 138 F.3d 1075, 1083 (6th Cir. 1998). Release of statements and
identities of witnesses and subjects of an investigation creates the potential for witness intimidation that
could deter their cooperation. National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire and Rubber Co., 437 U.S.
214, 239 (1978); Manna v. United States Dep’t. of Justice, 51 F.3d 1158,1164 (3d Cir. 1995). Disclosure of
identities of employee-witnesses could cause "problems at their jobs and with their livelihoods." L&C
Marine Transport, Ltd. v. United States, 740 F.2d 919, 923 (11th Cir. 1984). The Supreme Court has
explained that only "[o]fficial information that sheds light on an agency's performance of its statutory duties"
merits disclosure under FOIA, and noted that "disclosure of information about private citizens that is
accumulated in various governmental files" would "reveal little or nothing about an agency's own conduct."
United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 773 (1989).
For the purposes of determining what constitutes an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under
exemption (b)(7)(C), the term “personal privacy” only encompasses individuals, and does not extend to the
privacy interests of corporations. FCC v. AT&T Inc., 131 S.Ct. 1177, 1178 (2011).
INFORMATION WITHHELD PURSUANT TO EXEMPTION (7)(C) TO THE FOIA:
Access to workplace discrimination complaints filed by federal employees, against the IRS,
is denied.
COMMENTS
This office’s response to your request is as follows:
(1) Your request for “formal and informal ties that exist between the Department of Justice (DOJ), the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Government Accountability Office (GAO),
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
(TIGTA),” is granted.
The EEOC provides leadership and guidance to federal agencies on all aspects of the federal
government's equal employment opportunity program. The requested information is already
available online, via EEOC’s public website. See the following link: https://www.eeoc.gov/federal-
sector.
820-2022-005864
(2) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that section 1203 of the IRS Restructuring and
Reform Act of 1998 outlines conditions for firing IRS employees” is procedurally denied. No records
exist within the EEOC.
(3) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that 3,970 (three thousand nine hundred and
seventy complaints) were filed pursuant to section 1203 against employees of the IRS between July
1998 and September 2002” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(4) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that 419 (four hundred and nineteen) complaints,
which were filed pursuant to section 1203 were substantiated as violations between July 1998 and
September 2002,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(5) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that 71 (seventy-one) IRS employees were fired
from their jobs for violating section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(6) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that IRS and TIGTA have taken steps intended
to correct known problems in their processing of section 1203 employee misconduct cases – such
as lengthy investigations and conflicts of interest during investigations” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(7) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that both IRS and the TIGTA have responsibilities
related to section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(8) Your request for “the documents outlining the responsibilities of the IRS and the TIGTA pursuant to
section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(9) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the documents outlining the actions taken by the IRS and the TIGTA to correct known problems in
the processing of section 1203 employee misconduct cases – such as lengthy investigations and
conflicts of interest during investigations” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(10) Your request for “the number of complaints filed against employees of the IRS pursuant to Section
1203, between October 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within
the EEOC.
(11) Your request for “the number of complaints, which ended up being substantiated as violations of
Section 1203, between October 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022,” is procedurally denied. No records
exist within the EEOC.
(12) Your request for “the number of IRS employees, who ended up losing their positions of employment
for violating Section 1203, between October 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022,” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(13) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
whether employees of the IRS have the right to contact the EEOC or an agency official responsible
for the administration of equal employment opportunity (EEO) program when under investigation
pursuant to section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(14) Your request for “the names, the academic backgrounds, the professional responsibilities, and annual
salaries, of IRS employees, who have opted to contact the EEOC and/or an agency official
820-2022-005864
responsible for the administration of EEO programs upon learning credible information that they are
under investigation pursuant to section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the
EEOC.
(15) Your request for “the documents outlining the outcome of a Section 1203 investigation when an IRS
employee opted to contact the EEOC and/or an agency official responsible for the administration of
EEO program within the IRS” is denied pursuant to the seventh exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C.
§ 552(b)(7)(C).
The seventh exemption to the FOIA permits the agency to withhold information compiled in
investigative files where disclosure of such information could result in an unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy. In this instance, we cannot grant access to, or copies of, federal sector complaints,
if any exist, for which you are not a party to the complaint(s). 29 C.F.R. § 1610.17.
(16) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the GAO 2003 report recommending for IRS and TIGTA to develop (i) results-oriented goals for
processing section 1203 cases, (ii) performance measures that are balanced and can be used to
assess progress towards those goals, and (iii) methods for collecting and analyzing performance data
related to the goals and measures” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(17) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the Acting Commissioner of the Internal Revenue to agree with the recommendations
of the GAO March 2003 report” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(18) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the Acting Inspector General for Tax Administration to neither agree or disagree with
the GAO 2003 recommendations” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(19) Your request for “the academic backgrounds, the professional responsibilities, and annual salaries,
of James R. White, Kevin Dooley, Evan Gilman, Patty Hsieh, Shirley Jones, Stuart Kaufman, Anne
Laffoon, MacDonald Phillips, Kristen Plungas, Brenda Rabinowitz, Anne Rhodes-Kline, Andrea
Rogers, Wendy Turenne, Chris Wetzel, Bob Wenzel, and Pamela J. Gardner, at the time of their
employment with the GAO, the IRS, and the TIGTA,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within
the EEOC.
(20) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DOJ (OIG) March 2022 report advising FBI Director Christopher Wray of their concerns in the
manner the FBI delegates the responsibility for Internal Affairs Investigation (IAI) of FBI employees
who have professional relationships or friendships with the subject or witness of the IAI” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(21) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the FBI policy, which requires for FBI Supervisory Special Agents (SSA) to participate in certain
mandatory and elective ‘Development Experiences (DE)’ before they may be promoted to Assistant
Special Agent (ASA) in Charge” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(22) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
IAI as a required DE to be promoted from SSA to ASA within the FBI” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(23) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Full Field Office Inspections (FOI) as a required DE to be promoted from SSA to ASA within the FBI”
is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(24) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the FBI ongoing practice of (i) not assigning SSAs to FOIs of the field offices or divisions in which
820-2022-005864
they are currently employed; and (ii) requiring SSAs to attest that they have not been employed in
the division or field office that is the subject of FOI during the three years before being assigned to
FOI, to avoid potential conflicts of interest” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(25) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the FBI as a federal agency which does not observe similar practices for IAI as it does for FOI” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(26) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the circumstances which led to the OIG making public their March 2022 report” is procedurally denied.
No records exist within the EEOC.
(27) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the DOJ-OIG to note that the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the
Executive Branch (Standards of Conduct) located at 5 C.F.R. Part 2635 contain a section addressing
impartiality and related appearance issues” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the
EEOC.
(28) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the DOJ-OIG to note that Section 502 states than an employee should not participate
in a particular matter involving specific parties without authorization where the employee knows that
the matter is ‘likely to have a direct and predictable effect on the financial interest of a member of his
household or knows that a person with whom the employee has a covered relationship (such as a
relative or a person with whom the employee is seeking a business, contractual, or other financial
relationship) is or represents a party to such matter and where the employee determines that the
circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his
impartiality” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(29) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the DOJ-OIG to note in their March 2022 report that “an employee who is concerned
that circumstances other than those specifically described in Section 502 would raise a question
regarding his impartiality should use the process described in this section to determine whether he
should or should not participate in a particular matter” is procedurally denied. No records exist within
the EEOC.
(30) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a former employee of the Missouri Department of Mental Health
(DMH), who has on October 1, 2021 contacted his former employers to express several concerns
about conflicting interests that exist within his previous place of employment” is procedurally denied.
No records exist within the EEOC.
(31) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency, which has in response to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a.) W specific concerns
disclosed their policies about marriage in the Fulton State Hospital (FSH) Sexual Offender
Rehabilitation and Treatment Services (SORTS) center” is procedurally denied. No records exist
within the EEOC.
(32) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which makes the final decision as to whether patients/prisoners in SORTS
get to be married or not” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(33) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which prohibits for patients/prisoners of SORTS to marry one another” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
820-2022-005864
(34) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which does not in clear and unequivocal terms prohibit marriage between
staff and patients/prisoners” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(35) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which has conflicting policies on (i) marriages between staff and
patients/prisoners as well as (ii) marriages between patients/prisoners among themselves” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(36) Your request for “the policies adopted by [EEOC] on romantic relationships and conflict of interest at
the workplace” is granted.
Please find EEOC Directive 530.006 entitled EMPLOYMENT OF RELATIVES, totaling 4 pages, via
EEOC’s FOIA Web Portal.
(37) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
studies which have indicated that 30% of married couples have met their spouse in academic/work
setting” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(38) Your request for “the accounting firm or other online service recommended by your office for
employees to file their tax returns” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(39) Your request for “the complaints filed by employees of your office against the IRS pursuant to Section
1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(40) Your request for “the documents outlining the opportunities offered to employees of your
city/county/state/federal government to grow and earn a promotion within your organizational unit” is
procedurally denied as it is not reasonably described.
On 04/26/2022 Joanne Murray, a member of my Team, sent you a letter explaining this office’s need
for further clarification to the above request. Your 05/02/2022 response to that letter did not address
those deficiencies in your request.
(41) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who came to the United States of America (U.S.A.) in
December 2009 for the purpose of pursuing his undergraduate degree” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(42) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has on and off lived in the States of California,
Missouri, Maryland, and the District of Columbia, between December 2009 and July 2016” is:
(i) Procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC; and/or
(ii) Denied pursuant to the third exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i).
The confidentiality provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the ADA, and GINA prohibit the EEOC
from granting access to, or copies of, a charge brought by an individual to a third party of the charge.
The third exemption to the FOIA exempts this information from disclosure.
(43) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has previously been to the States of New York,
Tennessee, and Ohio, between December 2009 and July 2016” is:
(i) Procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC; and/or
(ii) Denied pursuant to the third exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i). See
item #42 above.
820-2022-005864
(44) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has held numerous jobs between December 2009
and July 2016 when living in the U.S.A.” is:
(i) Procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC; and/or
(ii) Denied pursuant to the third exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i). See
item #42 above.
(45) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has previously filed tax returns with the IRS” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(46) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the tax returns filed by Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, between January 1, 2011, and December 31,
2014,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(47) Your request for “the documents outlining the obligations of the IRS and TIGTA to preserve as a
matter of record the tax return filed by people living and working within the borders of the U.S.A.” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(48) Your request for “the tax returns filed by Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, between January 1, 2011, and
December 31, 2014,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(49) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man who has always filed single on his tax-returns” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(50) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has never been married” is procedurally denied.
No records exist within the EEOC.
(51) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has never had children and claimed dependents
on his tax return filings with the IRS for the purpose of getting deductions and/or other benefits” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(52) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the publicized success of the Child Tax Credit (CTC) in reducing poverty within the borders of the
U.S.A.” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(53) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man who has achieved the primary goal he had set out when
deciding to move to the U.S. for the purpose of obtaining a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) Degree” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(54) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has earned a B.A. Degree from Westminster
College on December 31, 2016,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(55) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who had successfully completed the Economics and
Political Science major he had declared with Westminster College in the month of May 2013” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
820-2022-005864
This response was prepared by Joanne Murray, Government Information Specialist, who may be reached
by telephone to (202) 921-2541.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M St, N. E., Fifth Floor
Office of Legal Counsel Washington, D. C. 20507
Free: (833) 827-2920
ASL: (844) 234-5122
FAX: (202) 827-7545
Website: www.eeoc.gov
May 9, 2022
VIA: [email protected]
Michael Ayele (aka) W
ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CIVIL LIBERTIES
P.O. Box 20438
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, 10013
Re: FOIA No.: 820-2022-005864
Policies on relationships and conflict of interest in the workplace
Information for career advancement, training, and education
Dear Mr. Ayele (aka) W:
Your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, received on 03/08/2022, is processed. Our search began
on 03/18/2022. The initial due date was extended by 10-business days per our letter of acknowledgment
dated 04/01/2022. All agency records in creation as of 03/08/2022 are within the scope of EEOC’s search
for responsive records. The paragraph(s) checked below apply.
[X] Portions of your request are as follows:
[X] Granted;
[X] Denied pursuant to the subsection(s) of the FOIA indicated at the end of this letter. An
attachment to this letter explains the use of these exemptions in more detail; and
[X] Procedurally denied as [X] no records fitting the description of the records you seek
disclosed exist or could be located after a thorough search and [X] your request is not
reasonably described. See comments below for further explanation.
[X] The disclosed record, 1 document, totaling 4 pages, is available via EEOC’s FOIA Web Portal. See
the following link: https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login. No fee is charged because the cost
of collecting and processing the chargeable fee equals or exceeds the amount of the fee. 29 C.F.R.
§ 1610.15(d).
[X] I trust that the furnished information fully satisfies your request. If you need any further assistance
or would like to discuss any aspect of your request, please do not hesitate to contact the FOIA
Professional who processed your request or our FOIA Public Liaison (see contact information in
above letterhead or under signature line).
[X] You may contact the Acting EEOC FOIA Public Liaison Michael L. Heise for further assistance or
to discuss any aspect of your request. In addition, you may contact the Office of Government
Information Services (OGIS) to inquire about the FOIA mediation services they offer.
The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National
Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-
6001, email at [email protected]; telephone at (202) 741-5770; toll free 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile
at (202) 741-5769.
820-2022-005864
The contact information for the FOIA Public Liaison is as follows: Michael L. Heise, EEOC FOIA
Public Liaison, Office of Legal Counsel, FOIA Division, Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, 131 M. Street, N.E., Fifth Floor, Washington, D.C. 20507, email to [email protected],
telephone at (202) 921-2542; or fax at (202) 827-7545.
[X] If you are not satisfied with the response to this request, you may administratively appeal in writing.
Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted in 90 days from receipt of this letter
to the Office of Legal Counsel, FOIA Division, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 131 M
Street, NE, 5NW02E, Washington, D.C. 20507, email to [email protected]; online at
https://eeoc.arkcase.com/foia/portal/login, or fax at (202) 827-7545. Your appeal will be governed
by 29 C.F.R. § 1610.11.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Heise
Assistant Legal Counsel (Acting)
[email protected]
Applicable Sections of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b):
Exemption(s) Used:
[X] (b)(3)(A)(i) [X] (b)(7)(C)
[X] § 706(b)
[X] § 709(e)
[X] § 107 of the ADA
[X] § 207 of the GINA
(b)(3)(A)(i)
Exemption 3 to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i) (2016), as amended by
the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538, states that disclosure is not required
for a matter specifically exempted from disclosure by statute if that statute:
(A)(i) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no
discretion on the issue[.]
Sections 706(b) and 709(e) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(b), 2000e-
8(e)(2006), are part of such a statute. Section 706(b) provides that:
Charges shall not be made public by the Commission . . . . Nothing said or done during
and as a part of [the Commission's informal endeavors at resolving charges of
discrimination] may be made public . . . .
Section 709(e) of Title VII provides:
It shall be unlawful for any officer of the Commission to make public in any manner
whatever any information obtained by the Commission pursuant to its authority under this
section [to investigate charges of discrimination and to require employers to maintain and
submit records] prior to the institution of any proceeding under this title involving such
information.
820-2022-005864
Section 107 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and § 207 of the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) adopt the procedures of Sections 706 and 709 of Title VII. See EEOC v.
Associated Dry Goods Co., 449 U.S. 590 (1981); Frito-Lay v. EEOC, 964 F. Supp. 236, 239-43 (W.D. Ky.
1997); American Centennial Insurance Co. v. EEOC, 722 F. Supp. 180 (D.N.J. 1989); and EEOC v. City of
Milwaukee, 54 F. Supp. 2d 885, 893 (E.D. Wis. 1999).
INFORMATION WITHHELD PURSUANT TO THE THIRD EXEMPTION TO THE FOIA:
Access to investigative files, to include correspondence, in which the issuance of your right
to sue has long since expired; Charge Nos. 28E-2014-00485 and 28E-2014-01070.
(b)(7)(C)
Exemption (b)(7)(C) to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C), as amended by the
FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538, authorizes the Commission to withhold:
records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that
the production of such law enforcement records or information . . . (C) could reasonably be
expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy . . . .
The seventh exemption applies to civil and criminal investigations conducted by regulatory agencies.
Abraham & Rose, P.L.C. v. United States, 138 F.3d 1075, 1083 (6th Cir. 1998). Release of statements and
identities of witnesses and subjects of an investigation creates the potential for witness intimidation that
could deter their cooperation. National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire and Rubber Co., 437 U.S.
214, 239 (1978); Manna v. United States Dep’t. of Justice, 51 F.3d 1158,1164 (3d Cir. 1995). Disclosure of
identities of employee-witnesses could cause "problems at their jobs and with their livelihoods." L&C
Marine Transport, Ltd. v. United States, 740 F.2d 919, 923 (11th Cir. 1984). The Supreme Court has
explained that only "[o]fficial information that sheds light on an agency's performance of its statutory duties"
merits disclosure under FOIA, and noted that "disclosure of information about private citizens that is
accumulated in various governmental files" would "reveal little or nothing about an agency's own conduct."
United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 773 (1989).
For the purposes of determining what constitutes an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under
exemption (b)(7)(C), the term “personal privacy” only encompasses individuals, and does not extend to the
privacy interests of corporations. FCC v. AT&T Inc., 131 S.Ct. 1177, 1178 (2011).
INFORMATION WITHHELD PURSUANT TO EXEMPTION (7)(C) TO THE FOIA:
Access to workplace discrimination complaints filed by federal employees, against the IRS,
is denied.
COMMENTS
This office’s response to your request is as follows:
(1) Your request for “formal and informal ties that exist between the Department of Justice (DOJ), the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Government Accountability Office (GAO),
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
(TIGTA),” is granted.
The EEOC provides leadership and guidance to federal agencies on all aspects of the federal
government's equal employment opportunity program. The requested information is already
available online, via EEOC’s public website. See the following link: https://www.eeoc.gov/federal-
sector.
820-2022-005864
(2) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that section 1203 of the IRS Restructuring and
Reform Act of 1998 outlines conditions for firing IRS employees” is procedurally denied. No records
exist within the EEOC.
(3) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that 3,970 (three thousand nine hundred and
seventy complaints) were filed pursuant to section 1203 against employees of the IRS between July
1998 and September 2002” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(4) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that 419 (four hundred and nineteen) complaints,
which were filed pursuant to section 1203 were substantiated as violations between July 1998 and
September 2002,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(5) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that 71 (seventy-one) IRS employees were fired
from their jobs for violating section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(6) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that IRS and TIGTA have taken steps intended
to correct known problems in their processing of section 1203 employee misconduct cases – such
as lengthy investigations and conflicts of interest during investigations” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(7) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the GAO to note in their 2003 report that both IRS and the TIGTA have responsibilities
related to section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(8) Your request for “the documents outlining the responsibilities of the IRS and the TIGTA pursuant to
section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(9) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the documents outlining the actions taken by the IRS and the TIGTA to correct known problems in
the processing of section 1203 employee misconduct cases – such as lengthy investigations and
conflicts of interest during investigations” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(10) Your request for “the number of complaints filed against employees of the IRS pursuant to Section
1203, between October 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within
the EEOC.
(11) Your request for “the number of complaints, which ended up being substantiated as violations of
Section 1203, between October 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022,” is procedurally denied. No records
exist within the EEOC.
(12) Your request for “the number of IRS employees, who ended up losing their positions of employment
for violating Section 1203, between October 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022,” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(13) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
whether employees of the IRS have the right to contact the EEOC or an agency official responsible
for the administration of equal employment opportunity (EEO) program when under investigation
pursuant to section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(14) Your request for “the names, the academic backgrounds, the professional responsibilities, and annual
salaries, of IRS employees, who have opted to contact the EEOC and/or an agency official
820-2022-005864
responsible for the administration of EEO programs upon learning credible information that they are
under investigation pursuant to section 1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the
EEOC.
(15) Your request for “the documents outlining the outcome of a Section 1203 investigation when an IRS
employee opted to contact the EEOC and/or an agency official responsible for the administration of
EEO program within the IRS” is denied pursuant to the seventh exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C.
§ 552(b)(7)(C).
The seventh exemption to the FOIA permits the agency to withhold information compiled in
investigative files where disclosure of such information could result in an unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy. In this instance, we cannot grant access to, or copies of, federal sector complaints,
if any exist, for which you are not a party to the complaint(s). 29 C.F.R. § 1610.17.
(16) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the GAO 2003 report recommending for IRS and TIGTA to develop (i) results-oriented goals for
processing section 1203 cases, (ii) performance measures that are balanced and can be used to
assess progress towards those goals, and (iii) methods for collecting and analyzing performance data
related to the goals and measures” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(17) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the Acting Commissioner of the Internal Revenue to agree with the recommendations
of the GAO March 2003 report” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(18) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the Acting Inspector General for Tax Administration to neither agree or disagree with
the GAO 2003 recommendations” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(19) Your request for “the academic backgrounds, the professional responsibilities, and annual salaries,
of James R. White, Kevin Dooley, Evan Gilman, Patty Hsieh, Shirley Jones, Stuart Kaufman, Anne
Laffoon, MacDonald Phillips, Kristen Plungas, Brenda Rabinowitz, Anne Rhodes-Kline, Andrea
Rogers, Wendy Turenne, Chris Wetzel, Bob Wenzel, and Pamela J. Gardner, at the time of their
employment with the GAO, the IRS, and the TIGTA,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within
the EEOC.
(20) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DOJ (OIG) March 2022 report advising FBI Director Christopher Wray of their concerns in the
manner the FBI delegates the responsibility for Internal Affairs Investigation (IAI) of FBI employees
who have professional relationships or friendships with the subject or witness of the IAI” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(21) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the FBI policy, which requires for FBI Supervisory Special Agents (SSA) to participate in certain
mandatory and elective ‘Development Experiences (DE)’ before they may be promoted to Assistant
Special Agent (ASA) in Charge” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(22) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
IAI as a required DE to be promoted from SSA to ASA within the FBI” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(23) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Full Field Office Inspections (FOI) as a required DE to be promoted from SSA to ASA within the FBI”
is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(24) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the FBI ongoing practice of (i) not assigning SSAs to FOIs of the field offices or divisions in which
820-2022-005864
they are currently employed; and (ii) requiring SSAs to attest that they have not been employed in
the division or field office that is the subject of FOI during the three years before being assigned to
FOI, to avoid potential conflicts of interest” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(25) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the FBI as a federal agency which does not observe similar practices for IAI as it does for FOI” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(26) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the circumstances which led to the OIG making public their March 2022 report” is procedurally denied.
No records exist within the EEOC.
(27) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the DOJ-OIG to note that the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the
Executive Branch (Standards of Conduct) located at 5 C.F.R. Part 2635 contain a section addressing
impartiality and related appearance issues” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the
EEOC.
(28) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the DOJ-OIG to note that Section 502 states than an employee should not participate
in a particular matter involving specific parties without authorization where the employee knows that
the matter is ‘likely to have a direct and predictable effect on the financial interest of a member of his
household or knows that a person with whom the employee has a covered relationship (such as a
relative or a person with whom the employee is seeking a business, contractual, or other financial
relationship) is or represents a party to such matter and where the employee determines that the
circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his
impartiality” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(29) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the decision of the DOJ-OIG to note in their March 2022 report that “an employee who is concerned
that circumstances other than those specifically described in Section 502 would raise a question
regarding his impartiality should use the process described in this section to determine whether he
should or should not participate in a particular matter” is procedurally denied. No records exist within
the EEOC.
(30) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a former employee of the Missouri Department of Mental Health
(DMH), who has on October 1, 2021 contacted his former employers to express several concerns
about conflicting interests that exist within his previous place of employment” is procedurally denied.
No records exist within the EEOC.
(31) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency, which has in response to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a.) W specific concerns
disclosed their policies about marriage in the Fulton State Hospital (FSH) Sexual Offender
Rehabilitation and Treatment Services (SORTS) center” is procedurally denied. No records exist
within the EEOC.
(32) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which makes the final decision as to whether patients/prisoners in SORTS
get to be married or not” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(33) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which prohibits for patients/prisoners of SORTS to marry one another” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
820-2022-005864
(34) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which does not in clear and unequivocal terms prohibit marriage between
staff and patients/prisoners” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(35) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the DMH as a state agency which has conflicting policies on (i) marriages between staff and
patients/prisoners as well as (ii) marriages between patients/prisoners among themselves” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(36) Your request for “the policies adopted by [EEOC] on romantic relationships and conflict of interest at
the workplace” is granted.
Please find EEOC Directive 530.006 entitled EMPLOYMENT OF RELATIVES, totaling 4 pages, via
EEOC’s FOIA Web Portal.
(37) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
studies which have indicated that 30% of married couples have met their spouse in academic/work
setting” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(38) Your request for “the accounting firm or other online service recommended by your office for
employees to file their tax returns” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(39) Your request for “the complaints filed by employees of your office against the IRS pursuant to Section
1203” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(40) Your request for “the documents outlining the opportunities offered to employees of your
city/county/state/federal government to grow and earn a promotion within your organizational unit” is
procedurally denied as it is not reasonably described.
On 04/26/2022 Joanne Murray, a member of my Team, sent you a letter explaining this office’s need
for further clarification to the above request. Your 05/02/2022 response to that letter did not address
those deficiencies in your request.
(41) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who came to the United States of America (U.S.A.) in
December 2009 for the purpose of pursuing his undergraduate degree” is procedurally denied. No
records exist within the EEOC.
(42) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has on and off lived in the States of California,
Missouri, Maryland, and the District of Columbia, between December 2009 and July 2016” is:
(i) Procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC; and/or
(ii) Denied pursuant to the third exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i).
The confidentiality provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the ADA, and GINA prohibit the EEOC
from granting access to, or copies of, a charge brought by an individual to a third party of the charge.
The third exemption to the FOIA exempts this information from disclosure.
(43) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has previously been to the States of New York,
Tennessee, and Ohio, between December 2009 and July 2016” is:
(i) Procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC; and/or
(ii) Denied pursuant to the third exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i). See
item #42 above.
820-2022-005864
(44) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has held numerous jobs between December 2009
and July 2016 when living in the U.S.A.” is:
(i) Procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC; and/or
(ii) Denied pursuant to the third exemption to the FOIA. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(A)(i). See
item #42 above.
(45) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has previously filed tax returns with the IRS” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(46) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the tax returns filed by Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, between January 1, 2011, and December 31,
2014,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(47) Your request for “the documents outlining the obligations of the IRS and TIGTA to preserve as a
matter of record the tax return filed by people living and working within the borders of the U.S.A.” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(48) Your request for “the tax returns filed by Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, between January 1, 2011, and
December 31, 2014,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(49) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man who has always filed single on his tax-returns” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(50) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has never been married” is procedurally denied.
No records exist within the EEOC.
(51) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has never had children and claimed dependents
on his tax return filings with the IRS for the purpose of getting deductions and/or other benefits” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(52) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
the publicized success of the Child Tax Credit (CTC) in reducing poverty within the borders of the
U.S.A.” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(53) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man who has achieved the primary goal he had set out when
deciding to move to the U.S. for the purpose of obtaining a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) Degree” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(54) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who has earned a B.A. Degree from Westminster
College on December 31, 2016,” is procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
(55) Your request for “[EEOC] communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about
Michael A. Ayele, (a.k.a.) W, as a Black man, who had successfully completed the Economics and
Political Science major he had declared with Westminster College in the month of May 2013” is
procedurally denied. No records exist within the EEOC.
820-2022-005864
This response was prepared by Joanne Murray, Government Information Specialist, who may be reached
by telephone to (202) 921-2541.
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Home
Explore
About the Missouri Department of Mental Health (MODMH) Employment Practices - #Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W - #Title VII of the 1964 &1991 Civil Rights Act
View in Fullscreen
In October 2021, there were 5276 (five thousand two hundred and seventy-six) employees working for the MODMH. Of those, 3752 (three thousand seven hundred and fifty-two) employees were women and 1502 (one thousand five hundred and two) employees were men. While 64% (sixty four percent) of the MODMH employees identified as White, 31% (thirty one percent) identified as Black.
Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W was previously employed for the MODMH. He has in 2013 filed a charge of employment discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against the MODMH. The charge of employment discrimination filed by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W with the EEOC was previously assigned Case No.: 28E – 2014 – 00485C. The charge of employment discrimination filed by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W with the EEOC has been subject of intense scrutiny for various reasons. Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has recently been informed by his former employers that 9 (nine) charges of employment discrimination have been filed against the MODMH between January 01st 2010 and December 17th 2021. Of those, the MODMH opted to engage in the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) program offered by the EEOC on 4 (four) separate occasions. They also declined to engage in the ADR program offered by the EEOC on 5 (five) separate occasions.
As of this writing, it remains unclear for the Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) why the MODMH opted to engage in certain ADR sessions offered by the EEOC, while refusing to do so for others. The AACL unequivocally denounces discrimination on the bases of gender, racial background, sexual orientation, national origin and religious affiliation. The AACL also unequivocally denounces discrimination against people with disabilities (PWD). The AACL has decided to publish this information to members of the general public because of the language used by the EEOC to describe their processing of Charge No.: 28E – 2014 – 00485C and also because of the EEOC frequent reference to this charge of discrimination. The AACL has effectively put the EEOC on notice that given their processing of Charge No.: 28E – 2014 – 00485C, they have forfeited their rights to represent Missouri State employees who [1] have opposed discriminatory practices in the service of healthcare pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA); [2] have been subjected to racially motivated internal investigations (and were afterwards cleared of that investigation); [3] have been fired from their jobs as retaliation; [4] have been arrested for demanding the payment of their salary for the job they have performed. Be well. Take care. Keep yourselves at arms distance.
W (AACL)
Michael A. Ayele
Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist
Audio-Visual Media Analyst
Anti-Propaganda Journalist
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search