	Statement

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased to have this opportunity to discuss the administrative redress system for federal employees. I have three points to make:
First, because of the complexity of the system and the variety of redress mechanisms it affords federal employees, it is inefficient, expensive, and time-consuming. Its protracted processes and requirements divert managers from more productive activities and inhibit some of them from taking legitimate actions in response to performance or conduct problems. Further, the demands of the system put pressure on employees and agencies alike to settle cases—regardless of their merits—to avoid potential costs. Third, alternatives to the current redress system do exist—in the private sector and in some parts of the federal government. These alternatives, including a variety of less formal approaches collectively known as alternative dispute resolution, may be worth further study as Congress considers modifying the federal employee redress system. A Complex and Duplicative System

reviews agencies’ final decisions on complaints. But two facts about mixed cases are particularly worth noting. A Costly System, With Many Costs Unknown

Just how much this multilevel, multiagency redress system costs is hard to ascertain. Among discrimination cases closed during fiscal year 1994 for which there was a hearing before an EEOC administrative judge and an appeal of an agency final decision to the Commission itself, the average time from the filing of the complaint with the employing agency to the Commission’s decision on the appeal was over 800 days. As things stand today, federal workers have substantially greater employment protections than do private sector employees. What are the implications of the extensive opportunities for redress provided federal workers? Federal employees file workplace discrimination complaints at more than 5 times the per capita rate of private sector workers. The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO discussed the administrative redress system for federal employees.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) the federal employee redress system is a complex and duplicative system that affords employees redress at three different levels; (2) the system is inefficient, expensive, and time-consuming because of its complexity and the variety of redress mechanisms available; (3) the system contains significant overlap, especially in mixed cases where two or more agencies review an appellant's decision; (4) redress system costs are difficult to determine because many direct costs are not reported and indirect costs are not measurable; (5) the most time-consuming cases involve discrimination complaints, which take an average of 800 days to reconcile; (6) the federal redress system provides its employees with far greater opportunities than do private-sector redress systems; (7) the federal system allows federal workers numerous appeals, evidentiary hearings, and district court trials; (8) federal workers file workplace discrimination complaints five times more often than do private-sector employees; (9) the current system is vulnerable to abuse and diverts managers attention from more productive activities, inhibits managers from taking legitimate actions against poor performers, and pressures employees and agencies to settle cases to contain costs; and (10) alternative dispute resolution offers some promising approaches to handling workers complaints, but these methods are underused and in the early stages of development.