On April 1, 2016, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mandate of its December 21, 2015, order, which summarily affirmed the dismissal of the appellants’ appeal. The court determined that the record was replete with examples of appellants’ misconduct at the district court level.
Walter T. Charlton, Counsel for Cynthia Artis, et al., in the extremely long duration employment discrimination case, Artis v. Greenspan Bernanke Yellen spoke about the Federal Reserve Board in 2002. Thirteen years later, the case is still active. The Board acts as if equal opportunity is an undeserved burden, one which it does not have … Continue reading Federal Reserve Board: Walter T. Charlton, Counsel for Cynthia Artis, Artis v. Bernanke, on C-Span in 2002; A note on John Roberts and Antonin Scalia
Following a dismissal with prejudice in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in September 2015 (docket number 15-5260, available at http://www.pacer.gov.
The tragedy of this case was the incredible length of time and waste of precious resources to resolve a claim of employment discrimination. It shows why there must be alternative dispute resolution for these type of cases.
The D.C. Circuit, vacating the decision of the district court and remanding the case to the district court, held that where counseling produces sufficient information to enable the agency to investigate the claim, that counseling purpose has been served. The court determined that the class members did provide meaningful information about specific instances of discrimination in the January 17 Resubmission document and offered corresponding allegations of discrimination against individual class agents. Such information, the D.C. Circuit reasoned, was enough for the Board to investigated and try to resolves the claims of the class members.
n reading the 2017 OMWI report, the report has essentially the same content and structure as in 2016; however, there were some additions. The additions are concerning as they allow worrying questions about the Board’s seriousness to this important issue, given its history in this area.
The reader is made to feel skeptical of all Board activities, even if true progress is being made. More explanation, and the elimination of obscurity, of programs being performed with the money of United States citizens is expected and required.
Only the comfortable can afford to laugh at those who suffered financial stress. The following quote comes from transcripts of the Nov. 1-2, 2011, FOMC meeting. That the laughter and joy at other people’s suffering comes from high-level public-service policymakers is galling.
The Chief Justice noted that district judges work hard, in obscurity and subject to certain criticism for the sake of public service. (On this note, there are many other civil servants that toil anonymously, also (for far less than $205,100 (see chart below)).)
This report is like a recipe of planning destruction in an organized way (creating a transition plan; checking that the employee is not fired on a birthday, shortly before a pension is vested, and so on) making it seem normal, but the effect of the employee losing his or her livelihood and income stream is notably absent. The immoral notion that human beings can be acquired, used up, demeaned, and then thrown away pervades the report. The notion that management persons are perfect by virtue of their position alone is illogical.
Legal Cases against the Board (current as of October 31, 2016)
[Board information last updated on September 12, 2016.]
(Case dockets can be accessed through http://www.pacer.gov.)