U.S. EEOC DETERMINES THAT JACKSON POLICE DEPT MANAGEMENT "PROBABLY" DISCRIMINATED ON ITS FEMALE EMPLOYEES!

UPDATED/REVISED, TODAY - MONDAY - JANUARY  18

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR BIRTHDAY 

JANUARY 15, 1929

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere

WHAT WOULD MLK, JR. THINK 

OF 

JACKSON TOWNSHIP GOV'T

TREATMENT OF IT FEMALES LET ALONE AFRICAN AMERICAN EMPLOYEES

 MATERIAL ADDED ON MONDAY

COMMENT ON BLOG:

Thank you for your outstanding report on getting the truth out there!   ...

Of the six complainants, 3 of [were]  police officers ... and the other three are clerical.

...

Hopefully with your reporting,  DOJ and EEOC being involved, their illegal and disgusting violations will stop.

[SCPR  Note:  EEO says there is "probable cause" to believe that a violation of law occurred]

Thank you so very much for your investigative reporting and outstanding contributions to this county.

ORIGINAL BLOG (published Sunday)

On Monday, America celebrates the life of Martin Luther King because his devoted his life even to the point of an all too early death for the realization of the equal protection of a law not only for African Americans but for all of us.

Accordingly it is fitting and proper (to use the renown phrase coined in in The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator) that Chai R. Feldblum, a commissioner of the United States of America Equal Opportunity Commission, (LINK) has this to say about King:

"Engraved on a hallway at EEOC is this quote from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' 

How true. I am proud that the people of the EEOC carry out the spirit of the great Martin Luther King every day, by investigating and remedying employment injustice wherever it arises."

All too many Stark Countians likely think that denial of equal opportunity happens elsewhere American but certainly not in Stark County, Ohio.

But the fact of the matter is that the EEOC has determined that in the case of six female police department connected employees - serving the Jackson Township public and the officer part of the contingent of six,  perhaps, possibly one day at the cost of their lives - probably have been unlawfully discriminated against by the management (in place at the time of the complained of discrimination) of the Jackson Police Department and by extension to the ultimate authority in the township; namely, the Jackson Township trustees, who, of course, are elected by a majority of the voters in the respective candidacies for office.

The SCPR began writing on the Jackson Police Department situation and allegations of denial of equal employment opportunity in January, 2013.

Readers of this blog would serve themselves well in understanding the December, 2015 determination by the EEOC that there is probable cause supporting the allegations of six female that township officials discriminated against them on the basis of gender factors by reading the following SCPR blogs:

• January, 2013 blog LINK,

• June, 2013 blog LINK,

• September, 2014 blog LINK

 In view of the foregoing material (recited in the "linked" blogs, it should be no surprise to anybody to see the follow summary of the finding a hearing officer for the EEOC made almost one month ago to the day:  December 17, 2015.

So, what is the next step?

According to EEOC material provided on its website:

• If EEOC determines there is reasonable cause to believe discrimination has occurred, both parties will be issued a Letter of Determination stating that there is reason to believe that discrimination occurred and inviting the parties to join the agency in seeking to resolve the charge through an informal process known as conciliation.

• When conciliation does not succeed in resolving the charge, EEOC has the authority to enforce violations of its statutes by filing a lawsuit in federal court. If the EEOC decides not to litigate, the charging party will receive a Notice of Right to Sue and may file a lawsuit in federal court within 90 days.
  

The SCPR tried to contact Director Mabry-Thomas, Trustee John Pizzino and the township's legal counsel to learn of the progress if any in the "informal process known as conciliation."

Look for updates on this blog.  In the event that the SCPR can get a read from either township officials or the EEOC on the progress or lack thereof on conciliation, The Report will make the information available to this blog's readers.

Readers will recall that the SCPR did a study of the inequity of pay ratios by various departments of Stark County government back in 2014.  (See "links" below)

Here is a listing of linkage to blogs which reveal what the SCPR gender equity analyses showed:

• Volume 1, April 21, 2014
• Volume 2, April 28, 2014
• Volume 3, May 5, 2014
• Volume 4, May 12, 2014
• Volume 5, May 19, 2014
• Volume 6, May 27, 2014
• Volume 7, June 2, 2014
• Volume 8, June 9, 2014
• Volume 9, June 16, 2014
• Volume 10, August 20, 2014
• Volume 11,  August 25, 2014
• Volume 12, September 15, 2014 (Jackson Township)

Of specific interest to the EEOC in its determination of:

• whether or not pay differential of men over women and opportunity,
• promotion opportunities, and
• the numbers of women

among the nations' police forces rise to the level of being legally impermissible discrimination and therefore subject to remediation either through:

• voluntary conciliation, or 
• forced through litigation

Right now, Stark County's Jackson Township level of government is being dealt with in the conciliation process.

It should be disturbing to Stark Countians and Jackson Township residents that the United States Department of Justice Equal Opportunity Commission has found enough evidence in its investigation of six complaints filed by female JPD connected employees that the commission believes it is probable that Jackson Township government has discriminated against these women merely because they are women.

Over half the population of Stark County, Ohio and America at large is comprised of women.

So how is it these documented numbers exist?

At the federal level (which is to say analyzing 1,140 state and local governments across the nation circa 2013):

And in Jackson Township itself:

Not a very pretty picture, no?

Something Jackson officials should be ashamed of, no?

And to get even more specific:

Since this blog is framed on Martin Luther King, Jr and his fight for racial equality, the SCPR understands that Jackson Department has only one black officer and perhaps he is the only black employee in all of Jackson Township government.

Think maybe Jackson Township government has a problem with women and Afrian-Americans within its employment ranks.

As King is quoted above in saying "Injustice [unfairness] anywhere is a threat to justice [fairness] everywhere"

Looking at the numbers above coupled with the fresh (December 17th) ruling of probable gender discrimination within the halls of Jackson Township, Stark County government,  how can anybody think that Jackson Township officials going back at least to 1983 have upheld the rule of law and their Constitutional obligation (having taken to an oath to protect and defend the Constitution) to see to it that "fair play" is the standard by which Jackson Township government has been administrator.


Ohioans, Stark Countians and Jacksonians likely think that the work of Martin Luther King, Jr. is a work to be done elsewhere but not in our own backyard.

Think again, folks!