The component is not available at this moment. Please contact the site administrator.
Representatives of the EEOC and the Civil Rights Department (CRD), formerly known as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, may seek to expand their investigation beyond the scope of the actual complaint. Your unsuspecting response to a seemingly innocent question or request for information can turn a relatively small individual claim into a major class action. During an investigation, overzealous agency investigators may seek information that appears to go beyond the scope of matters alleged in the employee’s complaint. Though you may not want to appear uncooperative, contact legal counsel for advice on how to respond. Providing more information than the investigation requires risks expansion of the charge and greater company liability.
In EEOC v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., an employee filed a charge of race discrimination with the EEOC. The employee alleged that Southern Farm discriminated against him and other agents on the basis of race. After an investigation, the EEOC filed suit in federal district court and requested a list of claims agents by name, position and race. Nineteen months later, the EEOC discovered a pattern of sex-based discrimination in addition to race discrimination. The EEOC then requested data about the sex of various employees in various positions. When Southern Farm refused, the EEOC issued a subpoena. An appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision refusing to enforce the subpoena, pointing out that the sex-based data had no relevance to the race claim. Information that the EEOC requests must be based on a valid charge filed by either an aggrieved individual or by the EEOC itself.1
1. EEOC v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., 271 F.3d 209 (5th Cir. 2001)