📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Merced County Grand Jury • 2004-2005

Merced County Equal Employment Opportunity Commission / Board of Supervisors — Complaint #04-05-09

2 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings and Recommendations 19 findings

F1 Page 29
The County has a Zero-Tolerance Anti-Harassment and Discrimination Policy for every county employee and elected official; however, any decisions made can be overridden by the Board of Supervisors.
No recommendations for this finding
F2 Page 29
New employees review an 18-minute orientation video on Sexual Harassment. They are required to acknowledge that they have received and read a written copy of the policy.
No recommendations for this finding
F3 Page 29
A complainant has up to 300 days from the alleged violation to file a complaint with the EEOC.
No recommendations for this finding
F4 Page 29
A complainant has up to 365 days from the alleged violation to file a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). 29
No recommendations for this finding
F5 Page 30
Although it is recommended that an employee file through the supervisor and continue through the chain of command, the complainant can file directly with the EEOC or the DFEH.
No recommendations for this finding
F6 Page 30
There are five federally-trained human resource analysts who investigate complaints within the County, or the County can choose to contract with an outside investigating party.
No recommendations for this finding
F7 Page 30
The Director of the EEOC may choose to investigate a complaint, or may excuse himself from the investigation if a conflict of interest arises.
No recommendations for this finding
F8 Page 30
After conducting an investigation, the findings are reported to County Counsel and the County Executive Officer who determine whether the complaint is substantiated.
No recommendations for this finding
F9 Page 30
In 2004, there were 18 complaints filed. Twelve of the complaints were against supervisors and/or managers. Of the 18 complaints, nine were closed and nine are still pending investigation.
No recommendations for this finding
F10 Page 30
Of the nine closed cases, six were substantiated, thee were not substantiated.
No recommendations for this finding
F11 Page 30
Two of the nine closed cases were investigated and substantiated by county investigators. One was issued a written reprimand the other was given a three-day suspension. Both of the substantiated complaints were against regular county employees, not management.
No recommendations for this finding
F12 Page 30
Six of the nine closed cases were not substantiated by the county and/or hired investigators.
No recommendations for this finding
F13 Page 30
Seven of the nine unsubstantiated, closed cases were against a member of management, Board of Supervisors, or County Counsel.
No recommendations for this finding
F14 Page 30
One of the unsubstantiated complaints was determined to have some merit due to the lack of professionalism displayed by the supervisor toward the employee. As a result, the Board of Supervisors ordered “Team Building” training to be attended by both parties.
No recommendations for this finding
F15 Page 30
The Board of Supervisors indicated that they are not bound by the Code of Ethics and Policies Regarding Workplace Conduct that applies to all county employees.
No recommendations for this finding
F16 Page 30
AB 1825 requires that all supervisors receive harassment, discrimination, and retaliation training by January 1, 2006. Retraining is required every two years. New supervisors must receive the training within six months of employment.
No recommendations for this finding
F17 Page 30
The county administered this training to all of its supervisory employees on April 13 & April 28, 2005. This training was conducted by an outside legal firm.
No recommendations for this finding
F18 Page 30
The county will have four or five employees trained by an outside legal firm to administer in-house training as needed.
No recommendations for this finding
F19 Page 30
The current complaint & investigatory practice does not allow for an unbiased, objective process because the EEOC investigators are county employees themselves and they ultimately report to some of the very people against whom the complaints originate.
No recommendations for this finding