To permit the EEOC to maintain a suit under these circumstances would frustrate the intent of Congress to encourage conciliation and good faith negotiations. Likewise, undue prejudice would result to all concerned in the instant proceeding. The defendant, North Hills Passavant Hospital, would have to litigate an event which occurred more than three years ago and which it amicably settled with the grievant notwithstanding the lack of cooperation or participation from the EEOC. The grievant, Mr. Pope, would be deprived of the settlement he achieved, despite lack of any interest by the EEOC and delay any relief, if any, he might get at trial for months, or even years.
The Court can well appreciate that a complex or a difficult set of circumstances may require an extended period of time for conciliation and require even more time for the preparation of the case for litigation. However, the within proceeding is not of that category. There was no extended effort by the Commission to continue conciliatory efforts. In fact, after the initial efforts failed, the EEOC issued a right-to-sue letter to the grievant and sat on the sidelines while negotiations and settlement talks continued between the grievant and the defendant, North Hills Passavant Hospital.
Moreover, the record reveals that the instant action is not based upon any illegal practices discovered by the Commission during the administrative investigation of Pope's charges in Civil Action No. 75-60. The EEOC in its answers to defendant's interrogatories contends that it is not aware of any other persons besides Mr. Pope who were discriminated against by the defendant, North Hills Passavant Hospital. Even the deposition of Mr. Pope, taken on March 21, 1975, reveals that he knew of no other persons who had suffered alleged discrimination at the North Hills Passavant Hospital.
Finally it appears to the Court that consistent with the legislative intent of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, once a right-to-sue letter issues, and a private party institutes an action on his own behalf, the only recourse left to the EEOC is to intervene in the case if it is one of general public importance. By the Commission's own admissions the only person possibly subject to racial discrimination was the grievant, Mr. Pope. If the EEOC were permitted to maintain the action now, it would completely negate the specific prohibition against a private party's maintenance of an action on his or her charge more than ninety days after the receipt of the right-to-sue notice. The statute provides that where the EEOC has brought the action, the person aggrieved may intervene. If the EEOC's ability to maintain the action survives the issuance of the right-to-sue notice and the expiration of the charging party's right to maintain an action, Pope would be able to intervene in an action where he was originally prohibited from maintaining himself because of his failure to comply with the statutory requirements. Such an interpretation would be repugnant to the statute.
In view of the above, it is the opinion of the Court that summary judgment should be granted in favor of the defendant, North Hills Passavant Hospital. Morover, since summary judgment is to be granted, there remains nothing before the Court and plaintiff's Motion to File Amended Complaint is refused.
Findings of fact and conclusions of law have not been separately stated but are included in the body of the foregoing opinion as specifically authorized by Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
An appropriate Order is entered.
And now, this 3rd day of November, 1975, defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby granted. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint is hereby refused.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.