White House Effort to Halt Job Bias Talks Seen : Legislation: But the Administration denies it is working to block the discussions between civil rights groups and Business Roundtable members.

Civil rights advocates accused the White House on Tuesday of trying to scuttle negotiations between big business and civil rights groups over a compromise bill to combat job discrimination against minorities and women.

The White House, however, denied that it wants to halt the private discussions between leading members of the Business Roundtable and organizations in the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

The charges and denials flew as the House prepared to take up H.R. 1, a bill that would reverse a half-dozen Supreme Court decisions that have made it harder to go to court or win judgments in job bias cases. The measure has strong backing from the Democratic leadership and some Republicans in both the House and Senate.

The House bill is similar to a measure vetoed last year by President Bush, who contends that the legislation would require employers to allocate jobs by race and sex to avoid costly litigation. Bush has submitted a counterproposal that he says would protect against job bias without forcing employers to resort to quotas to protect against lawsuits.

Seeking to attract enough support in Congress to pass a bill that would avert a veto, civil rights groups began last December to discuss possible middle-road provisions with the Business Roundtable, which represents more than 200 major U.S. corporations.

A new controversy has erupted, however, over recent efforts by White House Chief of Staff John H. Sununu and the President’s counsel, C. Boyden Gray, to discourage the business executives from participating in the discussions.

Ralph G. Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, charged that the Bush Administration is trying to “demagogue” on the issue for political advantage rather than promote passage of new legislation.

Steve Gutow, executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council, charged that Sununu and Gray were trying to undermine the negotiations, calling the White House intervention an “outrage.”

Presidential spokesman Marlin Fitzwater, while acknowledging that the top White House officials telephoned several corporate leaders to remind them they did not speak for the entire business community, said that the White House was not trying to end the talks.

“This is all part of the kind of backstage wrangling that goes along with this legislation,” Fitzwater said. “Anybody can talk to anybody.”

Meantime, the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents 500,000 smaller firms, reaffirmed its opposition to H.R. 1, which it said would compel “quotas, jury trials and excessive monetary damages.” The organization said in a letter to Bush that such provisions would be “devastating” to small business.

Fitzwater’s comments came after two of the chief negotiators for civil rights groups--former Transportation Secretary William T. Coleman Jr. and former Urban League President Vernon E. Jordan Jr.--went to the White House last Friday to complain about Administration interference in the talks.

In another development, a civil rights advocate reported that progress was made in last week’s discussions with the Business Roundtable but cautioned that a major issue--monetary damages in cases of intentional discrimination--had not yet been raised.

Civil rights advocates acknowledge privately that it would help speed passage of the legislation--and possibly avoid a Bush veto--if the Roundtable endorsed a compromise measure that civil rights groups could accept.

The Administration’s alternative bill would reverse or modify several of the same Supreme Court rulings but opponents contend that its overall effect would be to set back the interests of workers accusing employers of discrimination.

Last year’s civil rights bill was approved initially by big majorities in both the House and Senate. After Bush vetoed the measure, the Senate failed to override by a single vote.

During 1990’s congressional election campaigns, several Republican candidates made good use of Bush’s “quota bill” argument against Democrats who favored the legislation. As a result, many members of Congress want to be sure that they cannot be attacked in a similar way in 1992 if they vote for this bill.

Civil rights groups, therefore, also hope to win the Business Roundtable’s endorsement of a modified bill that would provide political cover for supporters.

So far, however, there has been no agreement and it may be difficult to resolve the major controversy concerning H.R. 1’s provision to allow unlimited monetary damages for intentional acts of discrimination by employers.

Richard Anthony, a Business Roundtable spokesman, said that the organization was not pressured by the White House and would continue the discussions.

“We will continue to be an active player on civil rights to make sure that any legislation that is enacted is acceptable to business,” Anthony said.