Federal Judiciary Updates Congress on Workplace Misconduct Review
“What we've been hearing—and what's supported by all the studies we've examined up to this point—employees need and want a less formalistic process," James Duff, director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, told members of Congress on Wednesday.
April 18, 2018 at 05:28 PM
4 minute read
The federal judiciary's ongoing review of workplace conduct procedures and policies has identified the formality of the complaint process as one barrier to keeping claims from being heard, an administrative official told Congress on Wednesday.
The official, James Duff, director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, was tasked with overseeing a working group created in response to the scandal involving Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, who retired in December amid claims of inappropriate workplace behavior. The working group has identified a number of reforms concerning workplace harassment.
Duff, speaking at a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee hearing on the judiciary's budget, said the eight members of the working group have met three times in person since January and have been in touch daily.
The working group has received feedback directly and through circuit courts around the country about barriers to filing complaints. In his remarks, Duff identified two current processes for filing complaints and outlined the various “formalistic” steps associated with them.
“The conclusions we're reaching—and this is still an ongoing process, we haven't finished our work and it will be an ongoing project because we'll want to review the progress we've made—but what we have determined clearly is that one of the barriers to filing is the formality of our complaint process.”
Duff told the House panel:
“What we've been hearing—and what's supported by all the studies we've examined up to this point—employees need and want a less formalistic process. The formal complaint process works—to the extent it's utilized. But many employees want guidance and counseling and we think intervention earlier on in the process so that you don't need to get to the formal complaint process. We are going to create other outlets for employees within the branch both at a national level and throughout the circuits.”
Duff said the working group has looked at, among other things, a U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission study of workplace conduct. That 18-month study of public and private employers found 75 percent of harassment victims did not report the alleged misconduct, he said.
“That figure is stunning,” Duff said. “What are those barriers, how do you remove them? How do you ensure that our employees have a safe work environment and one in which they feel free to complain without retaliation?”
One new measure, Duff said, will become part of the orientation process for new employees and new law clerks: a separate day focused on workplace conduct.
“I think we recognize there are bad apples in any barrel. But I think by and large we all recognize we are held to very high standards,” Senior U.S. District Judge John Lungstrum of the District of Kansas, chairman of the judicial conference's budget committee, told the House subcommittee Wednesday. “We should be held accountable if we violate those standards. I think once some of this informational situation is taken care of—so that people understand where things are—I believe that will help.”
The working group implemented “immediate improvements” regarding confidentiality provisions in place for judiciary employees and law clerks, Duff said.
Those provisions “had been misinterpreted by some employees and law clerks as to prohibiting disclosure of workplace misconduct,” Duff said. “That was never intended. We have made revisions already to the confidentiality provisions in our ethics guidelines for our employees and law clerks.”
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
Auditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readTexas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250