Public Interest Investigations

City's Discrimination Suits Down But Still Cost Taxpayers Plenty

Los Angeles Daily Journal
June 23, 2000
Author: Ed Kimble, Daily Journal Staff Writer

The good news is that in 75 percent of discrimination cases against the city of Los Angeles during the past three years, there was little or no evidence of intentional discrimination.

The bad news is that the other 25 percent are costing taxpayers plenty. In 1998 alone, the price Los Angeles paid in discrimination verdicts and settlements was $5.3 million (excluding attorney fees). And the city needs to establish its own credible independent discrimination investigations unit.

Those were the messages to the city's personnel committee Thursday from Public Interest Investigations Inc., the consulting firm hired in 1996 to handle discrimination complaints for the city of Los Angeles. Part of the firm's mission has been to put itself out of a job by recommending a structure for the city to handle its own investigation and resolution of discrimination claim.

PII recommended the city establish its own "mini-EEOC," staffed not by human resources personnel but by trained investigators and headed by an employment attorney. "Human resources staff, while they may be very qualified, are sometimes required to defend these claims. This creates the potential that they will not be perceived by city employees as impartial," said PII's president Keith Rohman.

"Perception is as important as reality in this area," Rohman said. "If city employees do not perceive the system to be impartial, they will be much more likely to pursue outside lawsuits."

Sharon Delugach, chief of staff for Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg, said the personnel committee would be deciding upon a new employment category for "investigator" in order to help implement PII's proposals. She said Goldberg has been working with different departments in the city to pave the way for transfer of PII's function to a city office, which would report either to the chief legislative analyst or the city administrative office.

PII's third annual report said the proposed discrimination investigations unit should be administered separately from the city legal defenders, such as the city attorney's office and the personnel department, and should even be housed separately from other city workplaces "to allow complainants the greatest degree of confidentiality."

PII reported that city employees filed 272 discrimination complaints from March 1997 through March 1999, of which it completed investigations of 222. In 25 percent of those cases, the report said, there was "specific evidence that discrimination, retaliation, and/or harassment had occurred." However, the report stated, only a small number of the cases featured overt discriminatory behavior. "More often ... the evidence of discrimination was more subtle."

On the good side, only three sexual harassment complaints filed during the past three years "met the legal standard," according to the report.

More problematic, the report said, were cases under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Many of those cases arose from misconceptions about discrimination and what the law requires, particularly when ADA and Workers Compensation issues were both present. "Typically, the city will allow the workers' compensation rules to 'trump' ADA requirements, leading to violations of disability law," the PII report stated.

PII recommended the creation of an ombudsman position for ADA-related issues. Such an "ombuds" would "develop training programs, review policies and procedures, and work with the city council and mayor to ensure that the city complies with the law," the report said.

Another glaring problem is that pre-litigation settlements come directly from the operating budgets of the accused, but after a complainant actually files suit any award or settlement comes from a city attorney-administered fund. "This dynamic provides a disincentive for operating departments to resolve complaints before litigation," PII said.

The solution offered by PII is to structure budgets so that awards and settlements are always paid from operating department budgets, therefore providing an incentive for the earliest possible settlement .

"In addition, adverse discrimination investigation findings should be reflected in the performance evaluations and/or personnel files of culpable city employees. The city also should impose mandatory discipline against employees found to have committed violations of city anti-discrimination policies," the PII report stated.

PII also recommended developing a computerized tracking system for discrimination complaints, promoting mediation to resolve complaints and creating training programs for all city employees about discrimination issues.

© The Daily Journal Corporation. All rights reserved.