Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

"Employees of the judicial branch of government not covered

Posted on: January 28, 2022 at 16:46:47 CT
TigerJackSwartz MU
Posts:
64113
Member For:
16.79 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
unless employed in competitive service positions. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(a)."

Full paragraph:

We gather from the documents you have provided that you believe a United States District Court has discriminated against you on one of the above bases. It is unclear, however, whether the alleged discrimination occurred in an employment context. The EEOC potentially has jurisdiction over your problem only if it occurred in the employment context, i.e., if you believe the court discriminatorily failed to hire you, terminated your employment, or otherwise discriminated against you in employment. Even if the alleged discrimination did occur in the context of your employment, Title VII and the various anti-discrimination statutes still may not cover you. Employees of the judicial branch of government are not covered unless employed in competitive service positions. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(a).

https://www.eeoc.gov/foia/eeoc-informal-discussion-letter-1
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

4smugs gets asked what law was violated - meatiger MU - 1/28 13:58:55
     sounds like something JG would type. ironic, isn't it? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 1/28 16:35:44
          Oh look. Dummy swooped in before the early bird dinner(nm) - meatiger MU - 1/28 16:57:34
     It’s in the Declaration of Independence(nm) - El-ahrairah BAMA - 1/28 14:17:10
     Title VII of the Civil Rights Act - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:09:48
          Thanks for at least providing some actual information(nm) - meatiger MU - 1/28 15:07:10
          So you believe even though the Constitution sets forth - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:29:35
               So you're saying Reagan promising to appoint a woman - SparkyStalcup MU - 1/28 19:21:10
                    No - Spanky KU - 1/28 20:09:10
               Yeah I don't think that Title VII applies - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 14:37:56
                    anyone who was passed over based on their race - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:51:16
                         a supreme court justice is not "hired" lol - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 14:59:42
                              Is an Ambassador hired? - Spanky KU - 1/28 15:07:42
                                   no an ambassador is appointed(nm) - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 15:10:27
                                        and placed on the federal payroll - Spanky KU - 1/28 15:16:42
                                             I don't care enough to research it but aren't appointees - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 15:20:57
                         how would you know if you were passed over?(nm) - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 14:55:51
                              If you are a white male or female federal judge you will be - Spanky KU - 1/28 15:00:25
                                   just following this to its ridiculous conclusion - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 15:05:18
                                        Likely a payoff - Spanky KU - 1/28 15:56:27
                         judges aren't in competitive federal service - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:52:48
                              The only federal employees exempted (per your link) are: - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:54:38
                                   no, it doesn't say "this applies to all federal employees" - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:59:35
                                        A judge is a federal employee(nm) - Spanky KU - 1/28 15:29:29
                                             but not subject to Title VII (nm) - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 15:35:24
                                                  "[1] Title VII and the ADA apply to employers (including - Spanky KU - 1/28 16:05:19
                                                       "Employees of the judicial branch of government not covered - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 16:46:47
                    It may not - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/28 14:48:10
                         It does not, per its terms. Perhaps your "clearly illegal" - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:49:12
                    It's technically a hire - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:38:27
                         The president doesn't "hire" he nominates - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 14:39:12
                              he 'recruits' - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:52:47
                              He starts the process - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:40:32
                                   Yeah I don't know but I think there has to be a distinction - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 14:46:24
                                        Any qualified person who was discriminated against based on - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:56:49
                                             there are no qualifications for SCOTUS (nm) - SwampTiger MU - 1/28 15:33:09
                                        I have no doubt the gov't has the ability - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:47:17
                                             no argument there(nm) - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 14:50:16
               Yes. - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:35:01
                    Setting apart the constitutional question, have you even - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:43:10
                         Judges are not exempted by that - Spanky KU - 1/28 14:57:56
                              But they are not included in the list of inclusions (nm) - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 15:02:20
                                   They are not in the list of exclusions(nm) - Spanky KU - 1/28 16:06:30
               So the feds can go after companies - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:30:43
                    you got it perfectly - meatiger MU - 1/28 15:04:28
                    Not sure I'm following, are you suggesting that companies - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:32:02
                         Nobody has suggested that (nm) - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:32:32
                              spanky has suggested that Biden has violated Title VII - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:33:20
                                   If the POTUS can hire based off race and sex - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:34:30
                                        oops (nm) - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:46:43
                                        I thought POTUS could not nominate an SC Justice - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:36:50
                                             stop deflecting and answer the question (nm) - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:38:00
                                                  well the initial question is whether Biden's stated - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:44:01
                                                       RE: well the initial question is whether Biden's stated - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:44:30
                                                            I'll be happy answer your secondary question - TigerJackSwartz MU - 1/28 14:47:57
                                                                 No clue - Sal CMSU - 1/28 14:50:36
          It is a very meaty Friday - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/28 14:12:34
     This is a hokie-esque post(nm) - Wildcat KSU - 1/28 14:07:50
     still tryna dance with 4Tigs every day I see(nm) - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 1/28 13:59:53




©2024 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard