Talk:Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs

Proposed Move

{move|Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs} -—Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulHanson (talk • contribs) 04:49, 27 June 2006

• Oppose Thouigh it may be the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, everyone calls it OFCCP. --evrik 17:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support. Articles should be at the correct name. A redirect from an acronym is just fine. While lesser know there is also the Oceanic Fisheries Climate Change Project. Vegaswikian 19:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Sure, but the fish have no article. :-) -evrik 21:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
    • And? Lack of an article does not mean a choice is correct. Vegaswikian 05:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Result

Moved, 2 in favour, one against, and in line with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (acronyms). The lead even spells out the name, so that makes very clear what it should be. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 05:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Change:

Should any potentially inflammatory, partisan or racially prejudiced opinions (without non-editorial supporting outside original research) be removed from this entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mallthus (talk • contribs) 19:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

• What do you mean? Labor Watch (talk) 02:33, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

• I believe Mallthus is referencing items such as "A good example of this is the Director's new Special Assistant, Claudia Gordon.[12] She is black, deaf, and a woman, a trifecta for OFCCP and affirmative action" or "The agency is also a place that discriminates. Preference is given to blacks and women. All the top management is black. Most are women. Sad place to be if you are neither. Most of the staff are like whipped dogs, too afraid to anything new or innovative." made in the last few weeks. Where appropriate, I have removed these types of comments as they are referencing opinion pages (such as blogs or public comments) or are conjectural interpretations of facts. I have tried to visit the contributor's talk page to establish a dialogue, but couldn't seem to find an appropriate place to post. Foxhoyle (talk) 05:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • All the statements seem to be referenced. Ole Brown Shoe (talk) 04:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

    What is the reference for the statement: "the underlying principle of these OFCCP regulations is that employment opportunities generated by Federal dollars should be available to all Americans on an equitable and fair basis"? 208.127.87.10 (talk) 02:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I would humbly submit that referencing blogs and public comments do not count as references. I am comfortable having a section referring to the fact that there appears to be some dissent in how the agency is managed, but I am not comfortable saying things like "the staff are like whipped dogs" and have that appear as an objective fact. Perhaps we could have a section titled "Controversy" saying "there are those who believe the OFCCP staff act like whipped dogs" and then reference the blog/post/public comment? Would that be acceptable? Foxhoyle (talk) 04:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Have at it. Ole Brown Shoe (talk) 04:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The legacy of the Bush era

In 2003, the agency adopted its Active Case Management (ACM) procedures to speed up the processing of Supply and Service cases. This system was developed by then Deputy Director to the Deputy Assistant Secretary, William Doyle.

The system was developed because of a lower number of high profile discrimination cases developed after the end of the Clinton Administration. This disparity was because of slow down in traditional enforcement implemented in 2001 and 2002.

The ACM procedure was a clear signal that OFCCP would no longer be enforcing the heart of its mandate, Affirmative Action. The implementation of the system also caused the agency to start 'creaming' its cases and only pursuing those cases that would produce a compensation or other discrimination case – this was a violation of the NationsBank court case.

Current status of the agency

After eight years of neglect, the agency is poised to return to relevance. This is reflected by the elimination of the Employment Standards Administration.

Most of the people at OFCCP are incompetent or afraid for their jobs. This is an agency that really does no good. Years of neglect by the Bush Administration has left the place a shadow of what it once was. Most of the investigators have never done a real review.

Contrary to federal law, the agency gives out its annual reviews based on a bell curve. Actual performance doesn't matter. The current top management are all refugees from other agencies. Since it's hard to fire SES employees, they all end up at OFCCP. Lorenzo Harrison, Patsy Blackshear and Bruce Bohanon all transferred to OFCCP because there was no place else to go.

The new Director is clueless about what the agency really does, and is like a puppet in the hands of her deputies. The regional directors are all mini-dictators who don't know their head from a hole in the wall.

The agency is also a place that discriminates. Preference is given to blacks and women. All the top management is black. Most are women. Sad place to be if you are neither. Most of the staff are like whipped dogs, too afraid to anything new or innovative.

A good example of this is the Director's new Special Assistant, Claudia Gordon. She is black, deaf, and a woman, a trifecta for OFCCP and affirmative action.

References