National Association of Black Defenders, Inc.
National Office
1 World Trade Center
85th Floor Suite 8500
New York, NY 10007
Florida Office
66 West Flagler Street, 9th Floor
Miami Beach, Florida 33130
Grant Information & Legal Help Line
(212) 335-9864
Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Double Standards for African American Female and Taxpayers Pay For Paramour Trip With Manager
On August 14, 2023, in the case of EEOC No: 570-2021-00652X, Maupin versus the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, EEOC Administrative Judge Oshia Banks approves double standards in the evaluation of African American Female and White Male Similar Situated Employee at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
Inasmuch as the White Male Similar Situated Employee was held to a far lower standard and received a higher evaluation than the African American Female. In accordance with NRC procedures and the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NRC and National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), each performance element evaluated must include a narrative that “clearly and explicitly justifies” the rating received. The Similar Situated White Male suggested that NRC attorneys call their Department of Energy Counterparts and drafted a page and a half letter that went through 18 revisions and NRC management deemed this as a 4 out of 4 rating of “Outstanding” which means the performance of rare and exceptional quality, with a very high quantity. The White Males actions were neither rare, exceptional quality nor of a very high quantity, yet he received a higher rating than the African American Female. The African American Female conducted three Congressional briefings on the hill, two public meetings, the 96-page technical basis for the disposal of highly radioactive waste containing Uranium-238 that was required by the Low-Level Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and had been delayed for 35 years. Yet, the African American Female received a lower score of 3 out of 4 (an Excellent) for Analysis and Problem Solving while the Similar Situated White Male received a 4 out of 4 for a “suggestion” and “drafting a page and a half letter.” The Judge did not consider any of the Complainant’s rebuttal information, especially the NRC’s violation of its own procedures and the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NRC and the NTEU in her findings.