EEOC Raises Estimate of Mishandled Age-Discrimination Cases to 7,546

The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission may have mishandled as many as 7,546 complaints of age discrimination since 1983 by failing to resolve them or file court cases before the two-year statute of limitations expired, Chairman Clarence Thomas told the Senate Aging Committee on Friday.

But EEOC, using a new law extending the statute of limitations, has notified all 7,546 persons that they may still be eligible to sue.

The law, signed by President Reagan in April, restores the right to sue until Sept. 29, 1989, for alleged discrimination dating back to Jan. 1, 1984. People who prove they were willfully discriminated against because of age may collect full back pay and recover court costs.

“We blanketed the world with these notices,” Thomas said in an interview, predicting that only a small percentage would ultimately prove to be clear-cut cases of discrimination. “We sent out the notices even when there is the possibility of duplication.”

The cases to be reviewed will include those that expired because EEOC had them in its files on time but did not resolve them or go into court within the two-year limit. Also among the 7,546 cases are an unknown number in which EEOC did not begin an investigation because the complainants waited more than two years to come forward.

The notifications include 487 mailed to residents of the Los Angeles area, 156 in San Francisco, 73 in Fresno, 35 in San Jose and 16 in San Diego.

The new total of possible errors is far larger than the original figure of 900 disclosed by Thomas after an internal inquiry and reported by The Times in January. The figure was later raised to 1,200 in figures supplied to a congressional subcommittee.

Under federal law, workers must file complaints with EEOC before they can sue their employers for age bias. After 60 days, they can file suit themselves regardless of the outcome of the agency’s investigation.

As a practical matter, though, most wait for their cases to be processed by the agency. Consequently, many people whose age-bias complaints were mishandled let the initial statute of limitations pass without taking legal action.

Thomas blamed the foul-ups both on his limited budget and on bad management by some staff members in local offices. “We don’t have the funds,” he said.

Thomas and EEOC have been under fire from some members of Congress for the handling of age-related cases, the only category of discrimination complaint with a deadline for filing lawsuits.

“EEOC headquarters had received repeated warnings from field offices that charges and cases were exceeding the statute of limitations,” said Senate Aging Committee Chairman John Melcher (D-Mont.).

EEOC’s 10-year-old computer system has serious flaws that “make it difficult, if not impossible, to track the thousands of age discrimination cases that are filed every year,” Melcher said. Complaints “frequently are shuffled between field offices hundreds of miles apart, requiring investigations to be conducted by telephone and the mails,” he added.

Thomas, EEOC chairman since 1982, said he had inherited an inefficient, poorly run agency and has been working hard to install a modern management system.

“We admitted age cases were missed,” he told the committee. “We appreciated what Congress has done” in extending the eligibility period for suits.

Two EEOC regional directors, from Houston and Charlotte, N.C., said the new computer system was working efficiently and enabling managers to keep track of their cases in a timely manner.

The law protects workers age 40 and older from discrimination in employment on the basis of age. The typical person filing a complaint is a white male in his mid-50s who lost a middle-management job during a corporate merger, according to EEOC officials.

Persons seeking information about their rights to sue can call a toll-free number, 1-800-USA-EEOC, for an introductory message.