ML20044B122

Errata to Transcript of 900503 Briefing in Rockville,Md Re Equal Employment Opportunity Program,Consisting of Related Info That Includes Statements from Committee on Age Discrimination & NRC Chapter of Blacks in Govt

ML20044B122
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/03/1990
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 9007170342
Download: ML20044B122 (20)

Text

'

yn Y

g 0'

g S.-

q

' 3 1-COMMITTEE ON AGE DISCRIMINATI0li SE!!!-ANNUAL EE0 COMMISSION BRIEFING APRIL 1990 The Committee on Age Discrimination (CAD) was established in 1977 to advise'the Executive Director,for Operations (EDO) and the Director, Office of small ano Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Civil Rights (OSDBU/CR), on matters related;to age discrimination and to m6ke recommendations to help ensure that-age is not.a factor in job selection, career development, promotions, training, and other employee related matters. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act l

of 1967, as amended, pertains to persons over forty years old and under the age.

of 70. This is the age span CAD focuses on since, by Congress' definition, l

this'is the "protectea" age group.

Although it is primarily concerned withi j

,possible impacts on-NRC-employees over 40, I am pleased to inform you that CAD has always incluoed members under age 40.

o Performance. appraisal ratings play a major role in general career development at NRC.. Any discrimination in the appraisal process can become manifest in the broader range of individual; career development, thereby influencing promotions, 1trainino, ano other advancement opportunities. -Performance ratings are also a

factor considereo during Reductions in Force.

The Committee has been evaluating non-SES performance appraisal ratings since L1982. As we have advised management in a number of reports, there has been i

strong statistical evidence of possible age discrimination with respect to performance appraisals for non-supervisory engineers and scientists at NRC. The statistical imbalances have been particularly pronounced for engineers and scientists over age 50.

In their analyses of the FY-87 and FY-88 non-supervisory performance appraisal data, the Office of Personnel stated that

" age-does=not seem to be a factor in assigning ratings." We continue to

~

disagree with this general conclusion. The Comittee has analyzed the FY-87, FY-88, and FY-89 performance appraisal data for non-supervisory male engineers 4

9007170342'900503

[h N.7 PDC

j 4

':L /

m W

A, q.

ih ijI

{ I l

i and physical' scientists. These are two job' classifications in which there are

(

sufficient numbers of employees to perform meaningful _ statistical analyses,

'!!eparate.;from.the general' agency-wide population. The FY.87 data indicated I

. strong statistical evidence of possible age _ discrimination in that engineers

'and scientists ever age 50 received substantially lower ratings than those

~

y under age 50.

For FY-88 and FY-89 these statistical imbalances intensified.

'Weiere gratified that the statistical imbalances in the FY-88 appraisals were brought to the attention of managers and supervisors by the EDO in his memorandum cated September 6,1989. However, we continue to be concerned and L

-do not understand why NRC's most senior staffers who work with health and safety-issuesareratedlower(onaverage)thantheirmorejuniorcolleagues, f

We wish to express our Committee's appreciation to the Office of Personnel for

.their.ccoperation and assistance in providing the data needed for our analyses.

We look forwaro to continuing to work with the Office of Personnel in our 1

aavisory capacity concerning age-relatec EE0 matters.

Dl' l -[-

,. k i u.

k.

j N-4

,y q

,M

[-r yl

?

~

u L $

4 nj 7pp

.,%y s

e

l 1'

ty

, w g

.t i

i

. +

x

[ {i r -

1 [t.

Pa

.h.

)

e-

,o FEDERAL WOMEN'S PROGRAM ADVIFORY COMH1TTEE-

+.

4 w

REPMT TO THE COMMISSION y'

Mrr Chairman,. Commissioners -- My name is Carolyn Stabler, l'am the Chair

{y of 'the_ Federal; Women's Program Advisory Comittee. The members of our f

7 an i

.h 1

'Comittee are happy to have this opportunity to address you.

t*

I oday we would like to focus on several issues that are of great concern to

.E T

4 qv f'

"FWFAC. Our major emphasis centers around the underrepresentation of women in y

y SeniorExecutiveService(SES) positions.

,a i

NF.C's work force is appreximately 33% women, yet in the Senior Executive y

. Service only 10 nf the 206, members are women. That is, approximately 5% of the o

SES are women, and less than 15 of the women in the NRC are in the Senior A

Executive: Service.

And what is even more disturbing is the fact that there.are ty i

~

ln.o black.or _other ' minority _ women within.the SES

' Previously this' might have 7

lbeen justified by the lack of technically traineo women in our agency or the lack y

w Q, f if w' omen.in grades-14 & 15 who'qualifice fer administrative SES positions.

,y}R The perceptions that support jobs are women's jobs or that we do not have technically j

@4 l %,y competent women are no longer valid.

But consistently men with technical backgrounds 3; a m 'have been. selected to fill even the administrativ'e support SES jobs, when y

coSpetent'womenwereavailablefortheseopportunities.FWPACbelievesthat 3

1 9qs i

gNRC has: sufficient numbers of women in grades 14 and 15 who are highly' qualified Mu

?

Nyg

,to be groomed for SES. Seventy-seven of these women are in technical q

\\; whh classifications,102 of the GG 14s and 15s are in administrative positions, l

w+

' including but.not limited to progam planning, budget, security and legal.

u 7

Lir,

r

\\

E ru y

W k.,

!OM fi

r g JpC,;y,iQU N. )'

.I

%:L a, n; 2

y

". p.

c W- :3 ' y,;;

y yc',

gy,'~

y

'r t_Z nt-1 sx h+, kl How', let'sMook$re; closely at PRC SES positions.

Out of 206 positions, 4B 153 are classified as technical, which leaves.53 SES positions cle'ssified q

cu M

pasinon-technical. Women have traditionally held most of the administrative y

E ositions.-in'the NRC, but not:at the upper levels. Ve would like to know why p

' ; women are not being given the chance to be considered for administrative

,n; p

[g:

support or technical SES positions. A review of the agency's past y

practices reveels that technica'l men are almost always selected for g

q#

nfe administrative SES positions. Some extremely well-que.lified women have started 7

7y iin,clericaljobsat_NRCandbeerpromotedonmerittogrades13,14or15,but-m

.ther they hit the " GLASS CEILING". We would like to know what steps you think 3t can be taken to change this pattern.

Cffice of personnel h'as been instrumental'in providing men and women at all grade <1evels the opportunity to develop and advance into positions of greater n

responsibility.

As a matter.of fact, FWPAC feels strongly that NRC. developmental

?

Lprograms hav'e helped womer to achieve training and visibility. Programs.like

(

': )

L the Womer's Executive Leadership Program and the Executive Potential. Program:

' for Mid-Level Employees = hav'e been in existence since 1985, yet out of 42 participants,-28 of them women, only ? have made it into the Senior Executive

'I Service and-they were both males.

' FWPA'C' acknowledges that statistically there have been significant gains for women 4

in grades 9-through 12, but-now it is time to focus on wcmen in grades 13 and above-and facilitate their natural progress into higher management positions, ib '-

. Increasing numbers of women are entering the work force with technical and

. e are all familiar with the Office of Personnel Management's K'

scientific degrees.

W

+>

J

-booklet Civil Service 2000.

If HRC is to stay in tune with demographic trends, i

y we must start now to utilize fully available skills and competence regardless of race, sex or national origin.

m.

?

f

l! '. ;k i

f'

o g s'. -- p i

a 6

We would like to ask your active support in establishing a goal for achieving-l 1more equitable representatie'nlof women'in;SES positions _in se ection of SES We.would'like ultimately to see represertation in SES proportional Leandidates'.-

to the number of women in grades'14 & 15.

For the short term, we would suggest mini-goals.

For example, out of the next 4 SES vacancies'we-could set a; goal of selecting one qualified woman. We are not asking-for special consideration, but only when a vacancy does arise and ouelified women apply for,the position,'we would like a firm commitment from management to judge y

'these' women solely on_their merit, j

\\

We,thank you for your time.

q i

i l'

1 l

i

. i l

M*

I

~--

R yg 1

[.?

STATEMENT 3-l Mr. Chairmanl i

'ILeome'before you today to speak on behalf of the NRC Chapter of Blacks In Government ( NRC-BIG ).-

NRC-Big is a local chapter of a national organization established to work towards the realization of equal employment and the cultural and professional development of Black peoples.

We serve many roles including that of an EEO We

. Advisory Committee at NRC which explains our being here today.

have participated in these briefings for a number of years now and as usual, appreciate the opportunity to comment on the NRC's EEO l

j Program.

Over the years, we have seen the NRC make progress in its attempts.

to address employment disparities and we applaud the agency for its efforts.-

Ontthe other hand that progress has been slight.

There.

i is still much to be done and we hope the agency will continue its-efforts to enhance employment opportunities for Blacks as well-as other minorities.

i' We be1ieve it is the responsibliity of NRC-BIG to speak cand1dly aoout issues that af fect Black employees.

We also believe that our I

ancia presentations have been greatly responsible for the progress

-that the agency has made.

In this regard, I would.like to re-visit an issue that we nave raised before, and that is the -lack of 01ack employees in management or supervisory technical positions

~ !

ano' technical positions at the EDO or Commission levels.

Despite the many efforts of the agency..this situation has persisted with

'no-sign of change for the future. Although much evidence has been

i presented to demonstrate a measure of progress in the agency's EEO program, we believe the lack of Black employees in these. positions j

is a mu'ch better barometer of the agency's progress anc f rankly Mr.

-l Chairman, it doesn't look very good.

I This issue is not some abstract notion, but rather a clearly recognizable concition that exists.

One has but to attend a senior staf f meeting or a meeting where technical policy issues are-being discussed to see that Black employees are conspicuously absent.

i Its not. easy to overlook the f act that there are few if any, Blacks attencing these meetings.

This condition by itself is important to note but more important is the negative impact it has had and continues to have on us.

Black employees see this condition as the real evidence of the much talked about " glass ceiling".

We can see through to the top but somehow there seems to be an invisible barrier keeping us from i

getting there. As long as this condition exists, it won't be easy for Black employees to strive for something they perceive will never be.

The real question for us however, is the reason this condition

. o

m. r exists.

We have' heardi it said that the reason is that White employees don't want.to work for Black t.1anagers or that licensees.

will Question the=technica1' competency of the agency.if women and

. minorities were-in_ management positions, or. that there are no cualified Blacks for such positions. - We hope that if such excuses are being used~to influence employment decisions when it comes to l

Black employees, those persons using them are identified and set straight.

Notwithstanding these attitudes however, we do'believe too littlei emphasis has _ been placed on preparing Blacks for management positions.

Yet, we are not here to condemn anyone.

Our goal is to seek out We effective solutions to a problem that simply will' not go away.

are aware _ that there is an initiative underway through which. the We encourage the medium of-IDPs may eventually have some-impact.

We also believe i

Commission and staf f to continue their ef forts.

that. continued emphasis' by the Commission to all levels of NRC i

' management on showing commitment by actions rather than' words, will j

have a significant impact on this problem, This _ concludes my ' comments and I' stand ready to. answer _ any.

j

-auestions you might have in regards to my u.tatement, i

i a

i

-SEMI ANNUAL EE0 COMMISSION BRIEFING MARCH 1990

-AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. ADVISORY COMMITTEE-

. Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, the'AAAC is pleased to be here today and appreciates the opportunity to share with your our concerns regarding the status o,' current Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and Affirmative Action (AT) issues at the NRC.

We will' focus our presentation on four major areas: 1) the AAAC assessment <

of the'1988 performance appraisal data and a comparison to the 1987

-performance appraisals data;.2) the AAAC analysis of the NRC Employee Su90estion Survey-and its implications; 3) the AAAC review of the NRC Rotational Assignment program; and 4) minority retention.

I

]

- AAAC ASSESSMENT OF 1988 NON-SES PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL DATA Since the August 1989 EE0 briefing, the AAAC has completed assessments 'of e

the FY 1967 And 1988 performance appraisal ratings for the non SES NRC.

staff' Copies of our. assessments were forwarded-to the Commission ano'the EDO-on October 31, 1989;and January 2, 1990, respectively.. For FY '87, we..

l noticeoisharp contrasts in the-trends and patterns of performance appraisal,

ratings on the basis of; age, gender and ethnicity.

At:all grades, White smoloyees received. higher ratings than their minority counterparts; White-

1. emales received the highest ratings and Black males received the lowest-

• stings..!n FY '88, w( did not notice similar contrasts on the basis of

encer and.etnnicity.

In fact, agency wide, there was an upward trend.for

_.j all non SES. staff appraisals.

During this appraisal period White females

antinued to receive the highest ratings while.-White males in grades.1 8 receiveo the lowest ratings.- As we mentioned in the last EE0 briefing, o

uomen consistently receive high performance. ratings; however, very few hold 1

-suoervisory positions.

Our major concern is still performance appraisal ratings of older male emoloyees inLgrades 13-15.

In FY '87, White males over age 3S. followed by Asian and Black males, received lower ratings than their younger

. counterparts. A similar trend continued in FY '88 for White'and Black

. males, indicating a dependence of appraisal ratings to age.- The age at anich the differences in gpraisal ratings became significant shifted to age 45.

For Asian males, age did not seem to be an significant factor. We did not attempt to identify the possible causes of this disparity.

t However, regardless of the reason, the observations are disturbing.

Employees in these categories comprise about 50 percent of the NRC's non SES work force. Therefore, nearly half of the agency's non-SES population is either performing at a lower level perhaps because they lack motivation, or the employees in this category are not being appraised fairly as their ratings exhibit a strong dependance on age.

s

p4 4

x 4

In our NovemberL16,a1989 memorandum to-the EDO, we made..severalJrecommenda-

~%

tions addressing our concerns:with the Employee Suggestion Survey results.

- We reiterate-some ofLthem in the context of performance rati_ngs; o'

The'NRC'should seek assistance of qualified outside professionals to'-

conduct face-to-face interviews with' randomly selected individualstin

. grades ~1315, as well as first and second-line ' supervisors,' to-

establish-the root causee of the observed disparities.in the.

_ erformance ratings of the senior male employees in the agency, and to p

develop strategies to; address them, o

'The NRC should continue to consider the feasibility of dual-track career.-

Within an office, individuals shoul'd be-moved every few years to give-

"F

- o the staff diversity of experience. Similar;to the interoffice rotational: assignments, long term intraoffice (interdivision ands

-interbranch) assignments should be considered.. Morale and -

-productivity at work are closely linked to an optimum match between-the aptitude and experience of an individual,- and'his/her work assignment-and future career goals.

They are also affected by the-attitude and personalities of the first and. second.line-supervision.

Therefore, staff reassignments would prove to'be beneficial in-ennancing staff morale and productivity.

. o The non-SES appraisal: system needs to.be modified.

Also, objective.

measurable, and job specific elements and standards must be prepared with the participation of the employees, improved guidance needs to-

e :eveloped for supervisors to-ensure uniform'" grading" across the:

acency.

~

o ine,1RC should examine the feasibility of obtaining a Congressional y

scoroval for possible-"early out" on a case-by-case basis, it might

e oest to " set free" a limited number of employees who feel trapped ano are willing to leave, and replace them.

i l

- AAAC ANALYSIS OF NRC EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION SURVEY

,j At the August 1989 EE0 Commission briefing, the AAAC' commented on-the-i results_of the Employee suggestion Survey. We indicated that>an. analysis of the negative responses by NRC employees-was needed. ~The AAAC provided such an analysis in the attached memorandum to the EDO, dated November 16,-

19.

The analysis indicated that minority respondents (Black,

/ Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and American Indian / Alaskan)- expressed a negative position than the majority regarding questions related to notion, career, EEO, stay beyond 3 years, recognition, awards, and cipline.

Based on the results of our analysis and other findings, we 9tified the.following concerns and believe the NRC should address them:

,.) fair treatment of minorities; (2) retention of minorities, especially Blacks; (3) EE0Lfor minorities; and'(4) career and promotional opportunities for all NRC employees. We recommended that the rpot causes of the negative responses by minorities, particularly Blacks, be identified and evaluated.

Among other recommendations, we suggested that greater use of Individual Development Plans (IDPs) be employed by the agency.

4 3

j y

Qf Y y

]

j On: January 22, 1990,.we received a response.to our' specific recommendations J

_V from Mr. Kerr's' office, on behalf of: the' EDO. : We have seen some encouraging evidence thats10Ps will be used in a oilot effort to enhance l

. a'

. the promotional poter.tial of Black employees. We believe..this effort is j

^

M commendabletand if successful, the focused use of IDPs should:be utilized J

.to foster promotional. potential by all NRC employees-

+

a With regard,to'our recommendation for determining ~the root.cause of h

' negative responses by minorities, we do not=believe this concern has been adequately. addressed by the NRC. We recommend that the negative responses by minority employees be independently assessed to determine the root causes. Additionally, we recommend that the.NRC evaluate the assessment

~

and initiate some corrective or follow-up actions to eliminate the.

l identified causes.

L AAAC REVIEW 0F NRC' ROTATIONAL AS$1GNMENT PROGRAM.

We have reviewed the rotational assignment program data that were provided to us'by the Office.of Personnel in July 1989.

The data was compiled from.

April-1987 to June:1989.i During that time period.a total of 134 NRC j

employees participated in rotational assignments.

All of the NRC program.

offices and most of the staff' offices have had some, individuals-involved in rotational assignments.

This representation is commendable and indicates an agency wide effort to support the program.

However, the-lack of

! specific 3 guidance or procedural direction ~ continues to raise many employee-questions.regarding.who is eligible and how to initiate a rotational' assignment.

i.

The AAAC believes that'.a better defined rotational assignment program could l

De utilizec more widely by-NRC-employees, thereby ennancing.the entire T,

' agency workforce. Additionally, the AAAC recommenos there be some incremental assessments performed of. the rotational assignment program..

These assessments should include: (1) interviews with program participants 1

upon completion of the assignment, (2) an evaluation of-the interview i

results. and (3) some feeaback mechanism utilizing the participants' input, t

l

} :

MINORITY RETENTION o

The AAAC believes that the retention of. minorities at the NRC is related to three interdependent factors. These factors are (1) recruiting minorities effectively, (2) ensuring fair and eq:1 table treatment for minorities employees, and (3) assessing the root-causes of why minorities may wish to E

leave the NRC (before they actually leave).

Minority recruitment appears to be receiving increased attention at the I

NkC.

For example, the NRR Intern Program includes several minority l

y participants. We feel this effort is commendable and should be expanded to all the program and staff offices. We encourage the Commission to continue its efforts to actively recruit minorities. We recommend that curreat, i

minority employees play a greater role in recruiting new, minor.ity employees.

r

, p

f,

'l

, j, m4

a$ g i fif,9; l{(

z

), y

?* _ -

~

y N

-It is not clear that minorities are being treated fairly and equitably at

,W the NRC; AsL reported earlier,- the-results of the Employee Suggestion:

Survey raised concerns regarding the ~ treatment of minorities. ' The overall 1ower performance' appraisal; ratings' received by minorities, in previous w ' %m

years, also-adds to the concern about-the treatment;of minorities =.

i

~

Further, it is noteworthy.that-there are few minorities in any upper p'

management positions. We submit that additional actions are needed to f *-

ensure that minorities are treated fairly and equitably at the NRC.

q-We are not aware of any effort that currently exists to assess the-root' causes of why minorities may wish to leave the NRC. We believe that such, an effort is needed if.the NRC is to successfully retain minority employees.

Again, as' reported in the Employee Suggestion Survey, a higher-percentage of minor.ity respondents indicated that they may leave the NRC within three years. We recommend that the NRC both evaluate and address the reasons minorities give for wishing to leave the NRC. Moreover, we believe such an evaluation should occur before rather than after employees-actually depart from their jobs. Additionally, we recommend that the current exit. procedure for NRC employees be expanded to determine root.

T causes for leaving the NRC.

We believe that to adequately retain minority.

employees the NRC must continue to be succesful with minority recruitment efforts, resolve concerns;regarding fair treatment.of minorities, and

-determine'the the root causes for minorities leaving the-NRC.

L!n summary, the AAAC believes that if addressed the concerns-we have

expressed will increase the productivity of the entire NRC workforce to' the benefit of all agency employees by improving the_ work environment, enhancing-employee moral. and ensuring fair treatment, i

in 6

ee e

a..

f.

I 4

i ENCL 0$URES i

i I

Tabular Comparison of FY '87 and '88 Performance Ratings Graphical Comparison of FY '87 and '88 Performance Ratings

[

Memorandum to EDO regarding AAAC concerns resulting from

.. s NRC's Employee suggestion Survey l

i i

t

(

1 1'

l

?

1 d

COMPARISON OF FY '87 AND '88 NON SES PERFORMANCE RATINGS FY '88 i

(FY'87)

Grace Range Gencer Ethnicity Avg. Age

.No. of Avg.

Employees Rating 18 M

Black 34.9~

25 3.20 (34.3)

(30)

(2.83).

18 M

White

-35.5 42 3.17 <

(36.9)

(42)

(3.07) 18' F

Black 33.0 140 3.23 (33.7)

(98)

(3.18)

'l-8 F.

White 43.0 321 3.50 (42.6)

(312)

(3.47)

I 9 12 M

White 35.6-68 3.22 (36.7)

(84)

(3.14) 9 12 F

Black 40.0 34 3.56 (42.3)

(32)

(3.38) 9 12 F

White 42.9 180 3.62 (42.7)

(128)

(3.60)

-.2 15 M

Black 43.3 48 3.29 (45.7)

(40)

(3.13)

3 15 M

White 46.8 967 3.37 (48.3)

(854)

(3.37) 13 15 M

Asian 48.1 89 3.40 (48.3)

(87)

(3.28) 13 15 F

White

41. ')

147 3.51 (42.7)

(113)

(3.52) i i

N e

i,.

'AAAC ASSESSMENT OF NON-SES PERFORMANCE AFFRAISAL DATA Average Rating 3,75

~3 m

. iii.

3,_

t..

id, i

~

'l m

g --! !

fl}- f:!

fi -

e e: _

n 4::

il 7:

k!

h

'f

.f k;

il li lj i

p

+:

w r,

i;

] ;',i M

ai 1!

a i!

11

<i

-i "i

^:

1 1

1 i

1 1

1 9

9 9

3

.*"i 8

8 8

8 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

2 5

5 5

5

c:*

M M

F F

M F

F M

M M

F 3...

B W

B W

W B

W B

W A

W M FY 1987 f**1 F Y 1988 se e

/* pee 9,

UNitts sTAtts i

'S'

. 4 -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION v asmotow. o. c. r:sss l-J.

4

'- ~ j h.

\\

'90v i e 1189 9

Memoranoum for:- James M. Taylor Acting Executive Director of Operations Througn:

William B. Kerr, Director Office of Smali and Disadvantaged Business Utilizati:n and Civil Rights from :

Raji Tripathi, Chaireerson-Affirmative Action Advisory Committee IUDOE*T:

CONCERNS RELATED TO THE RESUL!a 0F THE NRC'S EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION !JRVEY a gust EIO Commission briefing, the Affirmative Action Durtn; ne u

Advis:rv Committee (AAAC) commented on the NRC s Office of Personnel's (OP's. ".;ne -eport presenting tne results of the Employee Suggestion

Survey, 4e # eel that the OP *eoort generally highlighted the positive ascect: :i'**.e responses without eoually analyzing their negative impid: st d:9s The AAAC has analy:ec some of the survey data that ' ere

rov :a: :p ;P.

Brono :roolem areas are identifieo ano specific

nce

ex:-essed by tne-agency emoleyees are highlighteo.

• he CF e::rt hao soecifically mentioneo that "... Blacks responoeo ore egat vely to the survey cuestions than the rest of the emoloyees'.

.e nave examineo the survey oata.

The negative responses by various

_etnn : ;r:::s are displayeo in Figure 1.

Also indicated are the

(

num:er :f,responcents in eacn EE0 category.

The following fincings tre

te orthy:

~

ilt.( employees responceo more negatively than any other group o

ncerning opportunities available and fair treatment at the.

NRC.

~he specific areas of dissatisfaction expressed by Black e eleyees and the percentage of negative responses were:

romet;;nal opportunities exist (71 percent); career opportu.

-ities available (58 percent); recognition received (58 percent);

'nir awares (38 percent); fair promotions (27 percent); and, fair

iscipline (16 Dercent).

Figure 1 shows that Asians and Hispanics (a very small popula-tion exists for Hispanics) also responded negatively (58 percent and 50 percent, respectively) concerning adequate promotional opportunities at the NRC.

A higher percentage of Blacks (29 percent), in contrast to Asians o

(19 percent) and Hispanics (11 percent), responded negatively

3 i

concerning their expectations of working at the NRC three

[0ver the years OP has reported consistently i

c years from now.

high attrition rates for minorities, especially Blacks).

i Nearly half of the Blacks and American Indians (47 percent anc 50 percent, respectively responded negatively concerning o

the existence of equal employ) ment opportunities at the NRC.

The data were further analyzed to compare the negative responses Our evaluation provided by minority and majority respondents.

concentrated on: promotional and career opportunities at the NRC:

awards: promotions; and, discipline.

For these areas, negative responses were "never" and " disagree", while positive responses were

" agree", "always" and "sometime".

We excluded responses that were not relevant to the subject analysis:

"neither agree nor disagree":

"no basis for judgement"; and, " den't know".

The respondents were

(

categori:ed as minority (Black, Hispanic, American Indian / Alaskan, l

snd Asian / Pacific Islander) or majority (White).

Our aopr:ach excluded non-judgmental responses and provided an ooportunity to scentify the overall concerns expresseo by all Our findings are shown in the following table.

They res:ancents.

are statistically significant as determined by the Chi Scuare Test.

NEGATIVE RESPONSES TO EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION SURVEY OVESTIONS

--........,73gg__ 77 77-_.- 77 g---- 7777---- g773....._ 7 37__,77._

ionai Beyonc nition

1ine 3 years Minority 73 65 48 19 27 27

5 Major

ty 52 42 19 14 15 15 3

Those'cata show that:

Minority respondents (Black Asian / Pacific Islander, Hispanic and American Indian / Alaskan) as a group expressed a more negative position regarding all seven categories (promotional, career, EEO, Stay beyono 3 years, recognition, awards, and discipline).

The minority negative responses in five categories -- EEO, 1.

l o

stay beyond 3 years, recognition, awards, and discipline were two to three times higher than that of the l

majority.

l y.

r-y w-

-r-.,,-r- - -. -,.

.,v,,

n m

1

.)

L

_o 3

i c

3 o

In the two categories -- promotion and career -

it appears that $0 percent or more survey respondents j

expressed negative opinions about equal opportunities in j'

these= areas.

$1nce the sample is intended to. represent j

all NRC employees, this would mean that. half of the NRC employees are dissatisfiec concerning their prospects of career advancement or promotional opportunities.

These results of,the Employee Suggestion Survey raise the following concerns.hich need to be constructively addressed-by the.NRC 3

t management:

(1) fair treatment of minorities:

(2) etention of minorities, especially Blacks; (3?, toual employment opportunities for minorities; and, (4) :areer and promotional ec;crtunities for all NRC employees.

These :er:acti:ns presented in the Employee Su gestion= Survey unocuots:'.y reflect adversely on emoloyee mora e and performance.

t The as : :"e*: the foll: wing recommendations:

.e i;ency must seen assistance.of qualifieo outside professio-o

.a'.: to ::nouct face-to-face interviews with randomly selecteo 9n;s :y +5:loyees to identify the root causes of the negative e'

res::nses.

Appropriate strategies must be developed to address

them, 3

i The -emecial actions should focus on providing equitable career-L o

ano :romotional opportunities-to all-employees.

We believe.

i that these can be accomplishea by modifying some'of the existing ;rograms.

-,e soecifically recommend that each office identify a

ertain numoer of positions for rotational assignments.

• hes e positions should be " advertised" agency-wide.

t

- o'e strongly recommend that supervisors and empcoyees be encouraged to fully utilize the Individual Development Plans (lDPs) to define career plans for employees.

The

'lDPs should primarily focus on the needs and the career objectives of employees and should not be steered by supervisors.

Furthermore, management at all levels should be required to support IDPs.

As we recommended in the February 1989 EE0 Commission briefing, o

the agency must examine the feasibility of a dual-track career p

1

~~

6 lacder.

Such a method.cf career advancement and compensation has been successfully employed at other federal agencies.

It should enhance advancement opportunities for the NRC employees, The awards system at the agency needs to be re-evaluated for l

o equity and fairness.

These actions will remedy some apparent causes of employee dissatis-faction and enhance the employee morale.

Improved career opportu-nities, ecuitable recognition and compensation wtil ultimately help reduce the high attrition rate at the NRC.

We are available to discuss these matters at your convenience, h

N M' Raji Tripath, Chairperson Executive Committee Affirmative Action Advisory Committee fihl E iire. OP Wil' tam E. < err, OSDBUCR

!!O C:-.:: tee Chairs

0;l' h,l

,j,4' O

s y

t t

z..

g 4j W '

a m

3 agl

- CD f

('

(

g z-s-1 m.-,zO U

i uma w=

h A

t k.

i m

l 9iMtMMau% M M ME/fMs.i-[

nWXwwh4m 1ei l4 y.

3

- - ~ __. -

j[MMMMs5%sns%Mn%%\\suhY%%\\hW4 e O i

5 MZMfA }C amwhwwwwww c

y s = ; & ->= m w m _

w

[Ni$$N\\xNkNNNNDE%%NDxYY\\\\%DNNN "b

IA 1

O

'i 3NhWWWhhw\\h\\WWT}

2MMM l

2

=g-m =ww _

= =n_

w nggasssumasxwxsxxwn-xxxxxs\\x\\xwxxwxxx t g

R S

S

?

R R

2 (IN3D83d) 31V8 3SN0dS38 3NIV03N 6

o M

dddddddddhd#Hjf W W W W W..u u u u u u u uuuMUL a

~#AMSMiiT4. TO:

Occument Control Desk. 016 Phillips 9

f

'CVANCED COPY TO:

The Public Occument Room p

4

//[98 CATE:

g i:

r l

FROM:

SECY Correspondence & Records Branch 3

I Attached are copies of a Commission meeting transcript and related meeting 1

document (s).

They are being forwarned for entry on the Daily Accession List and ll placement in the Public Document Room.

No other distribution is recuested or recuireo.

l Setting

Title:

M>

d-pt [E# [h

+

i f

V I

I

• etting Cate:

678 /90 Open Y Closen i

ltem Oescription*:

Copies Advanced DCS

• 8 4

C,og, to POR o

1. TRANSCRIPT 1

1 M

g / h'.m e-4 / d

/

~

2. hbei @

A

/

Ww ' =.'! 2M 0

N

2. W. x ri J J.2) O I

I i

fmW M l

f

s. W a n nel k i

I l

n rr K ha i

s.A.2 a a uaL e -

/

/

i v

Q ils [d +p,AW W l

L i-

/'

j j

6.

_=

i l

f 5

l

• POR is advanced one copy of each document two of each SECY paper.

(

j [/

f 8,

C&R Branen files the originai.ranscript, with attacnments, althcut !!CY papers.

j

_