DISABILITY UNEMPLOYMENT RATE SURGES TO 16%; CHARGES RISE +38% (v. '07) AS COURTS, EEOC FAIL TO ENFORCE FED-STATE DISCRIMINATION LAWS.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(Free-Press-Release.com) August 30, 2010 -- September 6th, 2010, New York, N.Y.: The Wall Street Journal released an startling report last week “Disabled Face Sharply Higher Jobless Rate” announcing that the average unemployment rate for the Disabled rose to 14.5% in 2009 versus 9.0% for Non Disabled workers (16.4% for July 2010). According to End Discrimination Now, a non-profit advocacy group, these stats under-state the problem due to “classification” problems, permanently displaced “given up” work seekers, and a third of disabled workers actually retained only “part time” (no benefits or job security).

1 2

DISABILITY UNEMPLOYMENT RATE SURGES TO 16%; CHARGES RISE +38% (v. '07) AS COURTS, EEOC FAIL TO ENFORCE FED-STATE DISCRIMINATION LAWS.

Welcome visit Our WebSite:

http://www.enddiscriminationnow.com

Unfortunately, the EEOC continues to portray a completely rosy, false picture of private sector workplace, not only with the Disabled but with Minorities overall, E.N.D. asserts. On the EEOC website the lead story for “Celebrating the Anniversary of the ADA” affirms that the “Number of Workers with Targeted Disabilities Holds Steady After 13 Year Decline”. This specious pronouncement by Chair Jacqueline Berrien attempts to whitewash the alarming rise in Charges of discrimination among all protected classes by citing decade long trends in absolute numbers of Minorities hired that mask recent disturbing rate increases. The reality is that Charges of Discrimination rose 23% between 2006 and 2009 for all protected classes, while the Disabled rose 38% for the same period, an alarming rate. The attempt by the EEOC to mask this trend by deploying a 17 year time frame to obscure the recent data is disturbing. Further, along with discouraging lack of progress by Minorities into Management positions, the EEOC “brags” about it’s enforcement” and “litigation” stats whereby $294M in monetary damages were obtained for “resolutions”, while the average award is around $15K for arbitrations ($26K on “big” cases like the Sears class action case). However, spread over the 92K charges, the net is only about $3K per charge on average for all protected classes. These are not numbers that represent “success”, E.N.D. has repeatedly affirmed, they represent “a failure of deterrent and benchmarking against that failure”. Most of the cases tried by the EEOC are “class action” cases often involving hundreds or thousands of litigants. None are “made whole”. Court cases fare better but even awards in the $250K range are not deterrents for billion dollar corps.

The WSJ was candid about what one of the obstacles appears to be that “…some employers are hesitant to hired disabled workers because they fear added costs to provide special accommodations” which the WSJ admitted “would be illegal” in most instances. Kathy Martinez, Assistant Secretary for the Labor Department’s Office of Disability summarized the conundrum well: “The biggest barrier ...is attitude and fear—the misconception of what hiring people with disabilities might mean”. This conclusion is consistent with the Labor Department’s finding a sudden surge in unemployment for the disabled. Given the obvious prevalence of these biases, E.N.D. reviewed several studies performed on the issue of the Disabled versus Non Disabled populations in the workplace and found “no meaningful difference between the Disabled and Non Disabled on measures like “performance”, “efficiency”, “punctuality” and “turn over” (loyalty). Further, the IRS provides tax incentives for reasonable accommodations.

E.N.D. President Kathryn Jordan, who is disabled herself, considers most of the problem “perceptual”. “All discrimination involves ignorance and fear about people who are different from us. The Disabled often evoke the ugliest stereotypes ironically because of our societal obsession with physical perfection. This is particularly acute in industries like Advertising where a person “regard as” disabled is suddenly viewed as less competent, powerful, and/or intelligent. Peers in a competitive workplace with scarce jobs can be extremely vicious about hazing a disabled person, especially if that person is viewed as a competitive threat. The disability becomes a way to quickly “devalue” the competitor”, Jordan said. “That in turn is reflected in lower compensation and promo opps”.

E.N.D. has been particularly critical of the Justice System and its willful failure to tackle this issue of enforcement of Federal and State anti discrimination statutes. END President Jordan cites “over reliance on involuntary token “settlements” and “non-make-whole” litigation awards that only propound “a long history of failure”, and which fail to either compensate the victim or punish the violator. The latter often results in blatant, willful repeat violations at great cost to tax payers. Judges then “blame the victim” when she/he is re-subjected to this systemized abuse.

Jordan has been a pioneer in this challenge. She pierced the glass ceiling for Disabled women in 1994 when she was hired as an EVP by a division of Bates Advertising (WPP acquired it in 2003) to run their Planning operation. This was a $250K base salary position. To be hired, Jordan had to “mask” her disability status but was soon “out-ted” and subjected to daily hazing by her supervisors who demanded to know when she would “get better”. Ultimately, as she became “regarded as” disabled, the inquiries escalated to daily harassment and painful stereotyping as “a cripple”. Prior to the “out-ting”, Jordan was ironically viewed as an exceptional performer. Once out-ted, she was replaced by several outside “planning” hires. WPP’s attorneys claimed the adverse action was taken for “financial reasons”, a pretext that failed to persuade the Jury when they learned Bates was hiring new non-disabled planners from outside the agency at higher compensation. Nonetheless, Drinker Biddle refused to settle. After a decade of litigation, Jordan predictably won her case of “perceived disability” discrimination case after an 11 day trial. However, WPP’s General Counsel (acquirer of Bates), refused to pay the damages, instead posting a $3.3M Bond for an “appeal”, knowing that the legal arguments (JNOV) were collaterally estopped under NY Appellate Law. Enter the First Department, under Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, which reversed the verdict, after rendering improper “credibility determinations” and reviewing the JNOV again, while completely re-defining the “law of the case”but failing to remand the case for retrial. These latter acts of “case fixing” by judges have become widespread and often are deployed to garner favors with the violators themselves and their law firms. All of the judges who “fixed” the Bates matter were promoted.

Jordan experienced a similar situation at her subsequent employer Verizon Communications where she was hired to run their Branding-Identity (“Naming”) operations. She was initially lauded for her work until she asked her supervisor for an accommodation to mitigate 14 hour days including a commute. Her request was granted but subsequently the accommodation was withdrawn “as punishment”. Jordan was also hazed about her use of a cane to ambulate at Verizon as well (“You’re lucky we didn’t assign you to climbing telephone poles”). Her consequential injuries due to the hazing were so “severe” that she had a job related collapse in 2002. Jordan, who had previously been a strategic advisor to CEO’s and had run marketing operations for billion dollar businesses, was no stranger to hard work, fast turn arounds, or competitive conditions. Prolonged hazing was another matter.

Jordan blames the Judiciary for not doing its job as enforcer of the laws, instead doling out favors to corporate violators. E.N.D. has condemned the 95% “No Probable Cause” rate of the EEOC and the 95% “Settlement” rate of the NY Court System, often undertaken in token strong-arm deals, as failures of enforcement. Corporations are also allowed to “write off” unlimited legal expenses under current law. END argues that this encourages perpetual litigation that victims are wrongly blamed for.

In reality, companies who play these high stakes games are putting their most valuable asset at risk: their Brands. In Jordan’s case, her last two employers, Verizon and WPP Group, both admitted knowledge of the discrimination and failure to mitigate but decided, on the advice of outside counsel, Paul Hastings and Drinker Biddle, to drag Jordan, who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis, through 15 years of a “war of attrition” ( WPP Group, 7 years by Verizon), the goal of which was to suppress evidence (cheat) and circumvent the Laws. Verizon knew Jordan’s experts had affirmed she sustained “severe” damage inflicted by the hazing, yet Paul Hastings chose to bully her into a token coerced “settlement” aided by the orchestration of District Judge Shira Scheindlin behind the scenes. Jordan had no choice but to pursue the litigation given the withholding of elected ERISA benefits and other rights she needed to survive as a disabled person. Ironically, Verizon initially planned to re-hire Jordan in a more senior staff position after she recovered, but counsel Paul Hastings convinced Verizon to “litigate” (“run the clock”) as it had locked up a secret settlement deal early on with Scheindlin, one that it would strong arm Jordan with threats of “sanctions” into executing a final draft without legal review and under duress, embedding terms she had repeatedly rejected. Ironically,Verizon breached the Settlement a month after execution.

E.N.D. has been particularly critical of the Judiciary and the lax regulatory standards and has called upon the NYS Legislature for a“Judicial Reform Mandate”. Jordan personally has filed a landmark lawsuit alleging that the defendant judges acted “extra judicially” to obstruct justice and participated in an orchestrated conspiracy to cover up “case fixing”.
“This is not how I wish to be spending my time,”Jordan lamented, “but I was an eye witness to crimes being committed by those entrusted by the Public with enforcing the Law”, Jordan stated.

More information can be found online at http://www.enddiscriminationnow.com

end discrimination event     end discrimination group     fed state discrimination laws  ADA.gov     Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman     disability discrimination     disability unemployment rate     eeoc     Obstruction of Justice     VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS     WPP Group NYC