EEOC: High school diploma requirement might violate Americans with Disabilities Act

By Dave Boyer

Employers are facing more uncertainty in the wake of a letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission warning them that requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The development also has some wondering whether the agency’s advice will result in an educational backlash by creating less of an incentive for some high school students to graduate.

The “informal discussion letter” from the EEOC said an employer’s requirement of a high school diploma, long a standard criterion for screening potential employees, must be “job-related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.” The letter was posted on the commission’s website on Dec. 2.

Employers could run afoul of the ADA if their requirement of a high school diploma “‘screens out’ an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the ADA’s definition of ‘disability,’” theEEOC explained.

The commission’s advice, which does not carry the force of law, is raising alarms among employment-law professionals, who say it could carry far-reaching implications for businesses.

Maria Greco Danaher, a lawyer with the labor and employment law firmOgletree Deakins, said the EEOC letter means that employers must determine whether job applicants whose learning disabilities kept them from obtaining diplomas can perform the essential job functions, with or without reasonable accommodation. She said the development is “worthy of notice” for employers.

“While an employer is not required to ‘prefer’ a learning-disabled applicant over other applicants with more extensive qualifications, it is clear that theEEOC is informing employers that disabled individuals cannot be excluded from consideration for employment based upon artificial barriers in the form of inflexible qualification standards,” she wrote in a blog post.

Mary Theresa Metzler, a lawyer with Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia, said there may be an “unintended and unfortunate” repercussion of theEEOC’s discussion: “There will be less incentive for the general public to obtain a high school diploma if many employers eliminate that requirement for job applicants in their workplace.”

Officials at the EEOC said the letter in question addressed “a particular inquiry” and disputed that it would have repercussions in secondary education.

“No, we don’t think the regulation would discourage people from obtaining high school diplomas,” said Peggy Mastroianni, legal counsel for theEEOC. “People are aware that they need all the education they can get.”

She said the letter does not offer a new interpretation of the ADA.

Jeanne Goldberg, a senior lawyer/adviser at the agency, said the issue would come up only when high school graduation standards are not related to a specific job.

“This would never arise when the high school diploma is in fact necessary to do a job,” she said.

Ms. Metzler said the policy could lead the EEOC to bring claims against employers or encourage applicants who have failed to gain employment to raise the issue.

“The EEOC may be inclined to test its view on the high school diploma requirement and its impact on the disabled in a court case,” said Ms. Metzler, who is advising clients to “review their job descriptions to determine if a high school degree is truly necessary, or would aid the employee in performing the essential functions of the particular job.

“While such a requirement is routinely included by many employers, a deeper analysis may demonstrate that a lesser educational requirement might suffice,” she said.

Some worry that the EEOC’s letter could place less emphasis on a diploma in the workplace, but the push in Congress has been in the opposite direction. House Republicans sought late last year to reform the federal unemployment-benefit system by requiring recipients of aid who do not have high school degrees to be “enrolled and making satisfactory progress in classes” toward a General Education Development certificate or equivalent.

That proposal was not part of the final deal that Congress approved to extend a payroll-tax holiday for two months, but Republicans say they intend to renew their call for the reform this year.

Some corporate counsels are advising clients to adjust the way they approach the hiring process.

“Employers are wise to evaluate whether a high school diploma really is necessary to perform the essential functions of any job for which it is being required,” the Employer Law Report advised in a blog post by Lisa Whittaker, a lawyer with the Porter Wright firm, which has represented business clients for more than 150 years.

“Even in those situations where the high school diploma requirement can be justified, employers will still need to consider” whether a “reasonable accommodation” could be provided to allow a disabled person without a diploma to perform a given job.

© Copyright 2012 The WashingtonTimes, LLC. 

Romney Nips Santorum in Iowa Showdown

By Martha T. Moore and Carolyn Pesce, USA TODAY

CONCORD, N.H. – Iowa caucus winner Mitt Romney campaigned in New Hampshire on Wednesday, as attention shifted to a two-man race after Rick Santorum's explosive rise and near win in the first contest for the presidential nomination.

Romney won Iowa's Republican presidential caucuses by the narrowest of margins, the state's party chairman declared early Wednesday, finishing eight votes ahead of Santorum.  Michele Bachmann, who came in sixth, ended her campaign. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who came in fifth, went home to decide whether to stay in the race and later tweeted that he was bound for South Carolina.

Most of the talk on Wednesday centered on the battle between Romney and Santorum. Even former House speaker Newt Gingrich couldn't stop talking about Romney. Gingrich, who came in fourth after Texas congressman Ron Paul, laced into Romney at a campaign appearance Wednesday in Concord, N.H.  He told news reporters his New Hampshire campaign would focus on "the contrast between a Massachusetts moderate and a Reagan conservative," calling Romney a liberal who "repudiated Reagan-Bush, voted for Paul Tsongas, ran to the left of Teddy Kennedy and passed Romney care, which included state-funded abortions."


"The fact is, three out of four Republicans rejected (Romney)," Gingrich said. "Gov. Romney is a moderate Massachusetts Republican to the left of the vast majority of Republicans. I find it amazing that the media continue to say he's the most electable Republican when he can't even break out in his own party."

"I suspect it's going to be a very lively campaign," Gingrich said.

Gingrich warmly praised Santorum for running a positive campaign in Iowa. "If you looked at the dollars spent by Romney and the dollars spent by Santorum, you'd praise Santorum too,'' he said.  Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, and Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, each had a quarter of the votes cast in Iowa and traded leads during a long night of counting.  The race's razor-close finish at the top reflected what has been a jumbled and volatile race thus far for the chance to face Obama, a Democrat, in the general election.

For Santorum, who lost a 2006 Senate re-election race in his home state by an 18-percentage-point margin and who was an also-ran in GOP polls for most of last year, the outcome was the stuff of political dreams, even finishing barely behind Romney.
"Game on," Santorum said.  "We are off to New Hampshire," next stop on the primary calendar, Santorum declared. "We will win this election."  Santorum's New Hampshire political director, Nick Pappas, says 600 volunteers are working the phones. "We've easily doubled our volunteer totals since mid last week" when Santorum started rising in polls of Iowa voters.

Throughout the year, he has trailed his GOP rivals in fundraising — collecting just shy of $1.3 million through Sept. 30, federal records show. His supporters say campaign contributions surged with his sudden rise in Iowa, but Santorum is likely to be significantly outspent by Romney who amassed more than $32 million during the first nine months of 2011.

Romney is pumping $264,000 into television ads in New Hampshire, while Santorum is spending just $16,000 in the Granite State this week, according to the Associated Press Vince Galko, a Pennsylvania political consultant who ran Santorum's unsuccessful 2006 Senate campaign, said Santorum overcame a "shoestring" budget in Iowa with relentless campaigning.  "Whether they like him or not, people will tell you there are few people on the stump that can outperform him," said Galko, who also worked as a Senate aide to Santorum. "He comes across as this very sincere guy who says what he believes."

In the Senate, Santorum routinely logged 18-hour days, Galko said. "You can't out work him."  Santorum's task now is to build a campaign infrastructure in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and elsewhere to go along with the personal attention he has paid to those states. Some Republican political veterans don't think it's possible.  "The first six months of this year, he did more campaigning here than any other candidate, including Mitt Romney," says Fergus Cullen, former chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party. "That being said, he's got almost nothing to show for that."

Cullen recalls Pat Buchanan's victory in the Granite State in 1996, when he lacked the organization and logistics to fight on effectively against the eventual nominee, Robert Dole. In 2000, he says, Arizona Sen. John McCain faced similar difficulties against George W. Bush.  "If I were advising him, I would recommend that he almost look past New Hampshire," Cullen says. "He's got more time to rally his forces for a push in South Carolina."
Romney flew to New Hampshire on Wednesday where he accepted an endorsement from John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee.  He shrugged off the prospect of even sharper criticism from rivals such as Gingrich as well as Obama's re-election team now that he has narrowly affirmed his front-runner status.  "I've got a big target on me now," he said Wednesday, adding it doesn't faze him.

Tuesday's vote was the closest outcome since Iowa became an important first stop in the presidential nominating process four decades ago. George H.W. Bush edged Ronald Reagan by 2 percentage points in the 1980 Iowa Republican caucuses.  Paul thanked supporters and declared himself one of "three winners" in Iowa.  "We have tremendous opportunity to continue this momentum," Paul said. "Tonight we have come out of an election where there were essentially three winners. … We will go on, we will raise the money. I have no doubt about the volunteers, they are going to be there."

An entrance survey of caucus voters showed about a third most wanted a candidate who could defeat Obama, while about a quarter said their top priority was the selection of a true conservative. The survey by Edison Media Research for the Associated Press and television networks was based on interviews with 1,737 people.  Romney led among Republicans most interested in defeating Obama in the November election, the survey found. It showed Santorum won strong backing from Tea Party conservatives and religious voters. Paul scored well with young voters and people concerned about the federal deficit.

The caucuses were a first step, and not a binding one, toward selecting Iowa's 25 delegates to the Republicans' nominating convention in Tampa. The state has only a small fraction of the more than 1,100 delegates needed to win the nomination. But the Iowa contest is far more important as the initial measure of voter support, providing a leader or leaders with momentum and media attention going into the next round of state events and, perhaps, force some to abandon their candidacies.  Iowa is hardly representative of the nation. It is 91% white, with a population of just over 3 million people, and is the nation's leading producer of hogs and corn. Although it has a Republican governor and often elects Republicans to Congress, it is a swing state in presidential elections. Obama carried the state in 2008 with 54% over McCain.

One candidate, Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and Obama's first ambassador to China, bypassed Iowa to focus his long-shot hopes on New Hampshire.
New Hampshire holds its primary

Contributing: Susan Page and Catalina Camia in Des Moines; The Des Moines Register; Fredreka Schouten and Richard Wolf in Washington, D.C.; the Associated Press

Listener Lori from Garland sent The Wells Report this picture, which poses a very good question for the day.

Giovanni Capriglione's Family Dog-Jon-David says he looks like dryer lint

The Capriglione Family along with Family Pooch Doddy

You be the judge.  Sean, Technical Director for The Wells Report thinks Doddy is beautiful and very lucky.  Leave a comment and vote!
Find out more about Giovanni Capriglione and his run for State House District 98 here.

‘Fast and Furious’ Linked to Immunity Deal Between U.S. and Sinaloa Cartel, Trafficking Defendant Alleges in Court Papers

By Edwin Mora

December 29, 2011

(AP Photo/Arizona Daily Star, Greg Bryan)

(CNSNews.com) – An alleged Mexican drug trafficker awaiting trial in a Chicago federal court claims that the notorious Sinaloa cartel received weapons from “Operation Fast and Furious” under an alleged immunity agreement that the U.S. government made with cartel leaders, in exchange for information on rival gangs.

The defendant in a trafficking case before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Vicente Jesus Zambada-Niebla, also claims the immunity deal allowed the criminal cartel to “continue to smuggle tons of illicit drugs” into the United States.

He wants the U.S. government to provide documents relating to the botched gun running sting operation along the southwest border, arguing that it would benefit his defense.

Operation Fast and Furious, which began in September 2009, saw the Phoenix office of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives supervise the sale of guns to straw purchasers with the intent of tracing the guns to Mexican drug trafficking organizations and prosecuting their members. The ATF allowed about 2,000 guns to be sold in this manner.

The operation came under congressional scrutiny after it was linked to the December 2010 murder of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry at the hands of Mexican bandits.

An investigative report, spearheaded by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), found that most of the weapons provided to Mexican criminals under the operation were going to the Sinaloa cartel, arguably one of the world’s largest drug trafficking organizations.

In a court pleading filed last July, Zambada-Niebla made the claims about an immunity deal.

“Mr. Zambada-Niebla believes that the documentation that he requests will confirm that the weapons received by Sinaloa Cartel members and its leaders in Operation ‘Fast & Furious’ were provided under the agreement entered into between the United States government and [a Mexican lawyer] on behalf of the Sinaloa Cartel that is the subject of his defense …,” it said.

“Mr. Zambada-Niebla believes that the documentation will also provide evidence showing that the United States government has a policy and pattern of providing benefits, including immunity, to cartel leaders, including the Sinaloa Cartel and their members, who are willing to provide information against rival drug cartels.”

The defendant argued that he is protected from federal prosecution for trafficking drugs into the U.S. between 2004 and 2009 under an alleged immunity deal struck between the U.S. government and Sinaloa leaders.

According to court documents, Zambada-Niebla claims that the immunity deal provided the cartel’s leadership with “carte blanche to continue to smuggle tons of illicit drugs into Chicago and the rest of the United States” in exchange for information on rival drug cartels.

U.S. prosecutors deny the existence of such an immunity deal between the U.S. government and the cartel.

Nevertheless, the U.S. government last September filed a motion to invoke the Classified Information Procedures Act, which is aimed at assuring that national security information stemming from criminal cases – such as details associated with CIA operations – are not leaked to the public during court proceedings.

In a court pleading filed in September, U.S. prosecutors claimed that Zambada-Niebla’s allegations about Fast and Furious have no merit.

“Defendant requests all information in the possession of the U.S. government related to an ATF investigation referred to as ‘Fast and Furious’…” it said. “Defendants request related to Fast and Furious … and other unrelated matters are gratuitous and wholly unrelated to any legitimate discovery issues in this case.”

Zambada-Niebla, who was arrested in Mexico in March 2009 and extradited to the U.S. eleven months later, is accused of smuggling tons of cocaine and heroin into the U.S.

He claims he was working on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, FBI, and U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, court documents show.

The defendant’s pleading highlighted a July 2011 letter sent by Issa and Grassley to Attorney General Eric Holder, “suggesting that multiple United States agencies were employing as informants members of Mexican drug organizations.”

“The evidence seems to indicate that the Justice Department not only allowed criminals to smuggle weapons, but that tax payers’ dollars in the form of informant payments, may have financed those engaging in such activities,” the pleading added.