[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 11805-11808]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION ACT OF 2015

  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1557) to amend the Notification and Federal Employee 
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 to strengthen Federal 
antidiscrimination laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission and expand accountability within the Federal government, and 
for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 1557

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination Act of 2015''.

     SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       Section 102 of the Notification and Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 
     note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4), to read as follows:
       ``(4) accountability in the enforcement of Federal employee 
     rights is furthered when Federal agencies take appropriate 
     disciplinary action against Federal employees who have been 
     found to have committed discriminatory or retaliatory 
     acts;''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5)(A)--
       (A) by striking ``nor is accountability'' and inserting 
     ``but accountability is not''; and
       (B) by inserting ``for what by law the agency is 
     responsible'' after ``under this Act''.

     SEC. 3. NOTIFICATION OF VIOLATION.

       Section 202 of the Notification and Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 
     note) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Notification of Final Agency Action.--
       ``(1) Not later than 30 days after a Federal agency takes 
     final action or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
     issues an appellate decision involving a finding of 
     discrimination or retaliation prohibited by a provision of 
     law covered by paragraphs (1) or (2) of section 201(a), as 
     applicable, the head of the agency subject to the finding 
     shall provide notice for at least 1 year on the agency's 
     Internet Web site in a clear and prominent location linked 
     directly from the agency's Internet home page stating that a 
     finding of discrimination or retaliation has been made.
       ``(2) The notification shall identify the date the finding 
     was made, the date or dates on which the discriminatory or 
     retaliatory act or acts occurred, and the law or laws 
     violated by the discriminatory or retaliatory act or acts. 
     The notification shall also advise Federal employees of the 
     rights and protections available under the respective 
     provisions of law covered by paragraphs (1) or (2) of section 
     201(a).''.

     SEC. 4. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Electronic Format Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--Section 203(a) of the Notification and 
     Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 
     2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended by inserting ``(in an 
     electronic format prescribed by the Office of Personnel 
     Management)'' after ``an annual report''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on the date that is 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this Act.
       (3) Transition period.--Notwithstanding the requirements of 
     section 203(a) of the Notification and Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 
     note), the report required under such section may be 
     submitted in an electronic format, as prescribed by the 
     Office of Personnel Management, during the period beginning 
     on the date of enactment of this Act and ending on the 
     effective date in paragraph (2).
       (b) Reporting Requirement for Disciplinary Action.--Section 
     203 of such Act is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Disciplinary Action Report.--Not later than 60 days 
     after the date on which a Federal agency takes final action 
     or an agency receives an appellate decision issued by the 
     Equal Employment Opportunity Commission involving a finding 
     of discrimination or retaliation in violation of a provision 
     of law covered by paragraphs (1) or (2) of section 201(a), as 
     applicable, the employing Federal agency shall submit to the 
     Commission a report stating whether disciplinary action has 
     been initiated against a Federal employee as a result of the 
     violation.''.

     SEC. 5. DATA TO BE POSTED BY EMPLOYING FEDERAL AGENCIES.

       Section 301(b) of the Notification and Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 
     note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (9)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting ``, and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) for each such finding counted under subparagraph (A), 
     the agency shall specify--
       ``(i) the date of the finding,
       ``(ii) the affected agency,
       ``(iii) the law violated, and
       ``(iv) whether a decision has been made regarding necessary 
     disciplinary action as a result of the finding.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) Data regarding each class action complaint filed 
     against the agency alleging discrimination or retaliation, 
     including--
       ``(A) information regarding the date on which each 
     complaint was filed,
       ``(B) a general summary of the allegations alleged in the 
     complaint,
       ``(C) an estimate of the total number of plaintiffs joined 
     in the complaint if known,
       ``(D) the current status of the complaint, including 
     whether the class has been certified, and
       ``(E) the case numbers for the civil actions in which 
     discrimination or retaliation has been found.''.

     SEC. 6. DATA TO BE POSTED BY THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 
                   COMMISSION.

       Section 302(b) of the Notification and Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 
     note) is amended by striking ``(10)'' and inserting ``(11)''.

     SEC. 7. NOTIFICATION AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION 
                   AND RETALIATION ACT AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Notification Requirements.--The Notification and 
     Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 
     2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended by adding after section 
     206 the following:

     ``SEC. 207. COMPLAINT TRACKING.

       ``Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the 
     Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015, each Federal 
     agency shall establish a system to track each complaint of 
     discrimination arising under section 2302(b)(1) of title 5, 
     United States Code, and adjudicated through the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity process from inception to resolution 
     of the complaint, including whether a decision has been made 
     regarding necessary disciplinary action as the result of a 
     finding of discrimination.

     ``SEC. 208. NOTATION IN PERSONNEL RECORD.

       ``If an agency takes an adverse action covered under 
     section 7512 of title 5, United States Code, against an 
     employee for an act of discrimination or retaliation 
     prohibited by a provision of law covered by paragraphs (1) or 
     (2) of section 201(a), the agency shall, after all appeals 
     relating to such action have been exhausted, include a 
     notation of the adverse action and the reason for the action 
     in the employee's personnel record.''.
       (b) Processing and Referral.--The Notification and Federal 
     Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 
     U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

                  ``TITLE IV--PROCESSING AND REFERRAL

     ``SEC. 401. PROCESSING AND RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINTS.

       ``Each Federal agency is responsible for the fair, 
     impartial, processing and resolution of complaints of 
     employment discrimination and retaliation arising in the 
     Federal administrative process and shall establish a model 
     Equal Employment Opportunity Program that--

[[Page 11806]]

       ``(1) is not under the control, either structurally or 
     practically, of a Human Capital or General Counsel office;
       ``(2) is devoid of internal conflicts of interest and 
     ensures fairness and inclusiveness within the organization; 
     and
       ``(3) ensures the efficient and fair resolution of 
     complaints alleging discrimination or retaliation.

     ``SEC. 402. NO LIMITATION ON HUMAN CAPITAL OR GENERAL COUNSEL 
                   ADVICE.

       ``Nothing in this title shall prevent a Federal agency's 
     Human Capital or General Counsel office from providing advice 
     or counsel to agency personnel on the processing and 
     resolution of a complaint, including providing legal 
     representation to an agency in any proceeding.

     ``SEC. 403. HEAD OF PROGRAM REPORTS TO HEAD OF AGENCY.

       ``The head of each Federal agency's Equal Employment 
     Opportunity Program shall report directly to the head of the 
     agency.

     ``SEC. 404. REFERRALS OF FINDINGS OF DISCRIMINATION.

       ``(a) EEOC Findings of Discrimination.--Not later than 30 
     days after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issues 
     an appellate decision involving a finding of discrimination 
     or retaliation within a Federal agency the Commission shall 
     refer the matter to the Office of Special Counsel.
       ``(b) Referrals to Special Counsel.--The Office of Special 
     Counsel shall accept and review a referral from the 
     Commission under subsection (a) for purposes of seeking 
     disciplinary action under its authority against an Federal 
     employee who commits an act of discrimination or retaliation.
       ``(c) Notification.--The Office of Special Counsel shall 
     notify the Commission in a case in which the Office of 
     Special Counsel initiates disciplinary action.
       ``(d) Special Counsel Approval.--An agency may not take 
     disciplinary action against a Federal employee for an alleged 
     act of discrimination or retaliation referred by the 
     Commission under this section except in accordance with the 
     requirements of section 1214(f) of title 5, United States 
     Code.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--The table of contents in 
     section 1(b) of the Notification and Federal Employee 
     Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 
     note) is amended--
       (1) by inserting after the item relating to section 206 the 
     following:

``Sec. 207. Complaint tracking.
``Sec. 208. Notation in personnel record.'';
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:

                  ``TITLE IV--PROCESSING AND REFERRAL

``Sec. 401. Processing and resolution of complaints.
``Sec. 402. No limitation on Human Capital or General Counsel advice.
``Sec. 403. Head of Program reports to head of agency.
``Sec. 404. Referrals of findings of discrimination.''.

     SEC. 8. NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT LIMITATION.

       Section 2302(b) of title 5, United States Code is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (13)--
       (A) by inserting ``or the Office of Special Counsel'' after 
     ``Inspector General'';
       (B) by striking ``implement'' and inserting ``(A) 
     implement''; and
       (C) by striking the period that follows the quoted material 
     and inserting ``; or'';
       (2) by adding after subparagraph (A), as added by paragraph 
     (1)(B), and preceding the flush left matter that follows 
     paragraph (13), the following:
       ``(B) implement or enforce any nondisclosure policy, form, 
     or agreement, if such policy, form, or agreement prohibits or 
     restricts an employee from disclosing to Congress, the Office 
     of Special Counsel, or an Office of the Inspector General any 
     information that relates to any violation of any law, rule, 
     or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an 
     abuse of authority, or a substantial, and specific danger to 
     public health or safety, or any other whistleblower 
     protection.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Chaffetz) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.


                             General Leave

  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Utah?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today in support of H.R. 1557, introduced by my friend and 
ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Mr. 
Cummings of Maryland. He has done yeoman's work on this content. I was 
proud to join him as a cosponsor of this important piece of legislation 
that will help many of our Federal workers as they go through their 
work in knowing they have even more protections.
  The Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015 strengthens 
accountability within our Federal workforce. The bill does so by 
improving agencies' processes for reporting instances of workplace 
discrimination and retaliation. It also requires agencies to create a 
system to track complaints of discrimination and retaliation from 
beginning to end.
  The bill ensures that agencies report to the Equal Employment 
Opportunity Commission whether disciplinary action has been taken 
against an employee for discrimination or retaliation. It requires 
agencies to provide electronic notification to employees when such an 
action occurs.
  The bill requires agencies to post additional information about 
discriminatory practices on their Web site. It also requires that 
adverse actions taken against any employee for discrimination or 
retaliation be included in that individual's personnel file.
  Combined, these provisions bring additional transparency and 
accountability to the Federal civil service and will help diminish 
instances of discrimination and retaliation within our government. 
Obviously, those things can't stand.
  The bill also makes agency Equal Employment offices a direct report 
to the agency head. This is an important step and a good portion of the 
bill that is being brought forth today. This change will help ensure 
that employees feel safe and comfortable when reporting discriminatory 
or retaliatory actions.
  Finally, H.R. 1557 makes clear that employees can report waste, 
fraud, and abuse within their agency to Congress, the Office of Special 
Counsel, or the inspectors general.
  Federal employees are essential in exposing wrongdoing within the 
government. An agency should never have the ability to tell a 
government employee that he or she cannot report waste, fraud, or abuse 
to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or the inspectors general. 
The bill reinforces that obstructing an employee's communication with 
Congress and other watchdogs is against the law.
  We should be encouraging open communication between Federal employees 
and Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, and the inspectors general 
to protect the integrity of our government and the taxpayers.
  I want to again thank Mr. Cummings for his leadership and work on 
this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1557.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As the author of the Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act, I would 
like to thank Chairman Chaffetz and his staff for working with me in 
drafting this bipartisan legislation. I also appreciate the chairman's 
support for this bill during the committee's consideration this past 
March.
  I thank Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton for cosponsoring the 
bill. As a former Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission, her expertise in employment law is unparalleled in 
Congress.
  I also appreciate the support of Representatives James Sensenbrenner 
and Sheila Jackson Lee, who cosponsored the bill.
  I especially want to thank Tanya Ward Jordan, Paulette Taylor, and 
all the members of the Coalition 4 Change, also known as C4C, for their 
invaluable assistance on this legislation.
  I am also grateful that this bill has strong support of the Make It 
Safe Coalition.
  Both C4C and the Make It Safe Coalition are dedicated to ending 
discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers in the Federal 
workplace, and I applaud their leadership and their hard work.
  The Federal EEO programs are critical to ensuring that Federal 
workplaces are free from discrimination and that any barriers impeding 
fairness in

[[Page 11807]]

personnel decisions are identified and eliminated. These programs exist 
to ensure that our Federal workplaces uphold the guarantee of equal 
opportunity. That is the right of every citizen in this great country.
  If discrimination occurs, these programs must be able to investigate 
and adjudicate employee complaints impartially and in a timely manner.

                              {time}  1700

  In fiscal year 2012, Federal employees and job applicants filed 
nearly 16,000 complaints alleging that they had been victims of 
discrimination. Although the vast majority of Federal workplaces are in 
compliance with current EEO requirements, some Federal agencies have 
failed to meet the standards of a model EEO program.
  For example, in 2014, the EEOC issued a report on the Social Security 
Administration that made 12 findings regarding Social Security's 
failure to maintain a model EEOC program, ensure efficient management 
of the various stages of the complaint process, provide uniform 
training to ensure equal opportunities, and implement effective and 
efficient antiharassment policies and procedures. The EEOC made more 
than 60 recommendations for reform of that one program alone.
  My bill would require that EEO programs operate independently of an 
agency's human resources or general counsel offices and that the head 
of the program report directly to the head of an agency. This would 
ensure that effective implementation of the EEO program is prioritized 
at the highest level of an agency and that program's sole purpose is 
ensuring equal opportunity for all employees.
  H.R. 1557 would also strengthen the accountability mechanisms that 
are central to the effectiveness of the EEO process. This legislation 
would expand the notifications that agencies are required to provide 
when discrimination is found to have occurred and would require 
agencies to track and report whether such findings have resulted in any 
disciplinary action.
  Finally, the act would prohibit the use of nondisclosure agreements 
that restrict an employee from disclosing to Congress, the office of 
special counsel, or an inspector general any information that relates 
to any violation of law, rule, or regulation or instance of waste, 
fraud, or abuse.
  According to the 2014 Federal employee viewpoint survey, only 60 
percent of Federal employees agreed that they could ``disclose a 
suspected violation of any law, rule, or regulation without fear of 
reprisal.''
  As I often say, we are better than that. Employees need to have 
confidence that they can report an act of discrimination without 
suffering retaliation, and they need to know that such reports will be 
thoroughly, fairly, and timely investigated and adjudicated.
  The Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015 will strengthen 
existing requirements to ensure that Federal EEO programs meet these 
standards and that agency management of the EEO process follows the 
best practices available.
  Again, I take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to thank Chairman Chaffetz. This 
was truly a bipartisan effort. We saw a problem, and we put our heads 
together and tried to address it. I would urge all Members of the House 
to vote for it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me rise today to thank both the 
chairman and the ranking member of this committee, Mr. Chaffetz and Mr. 
Cummings, for their leadership on a very important issue, which I rise 
to be part of and with a little history on this issue with the earlier 
passage of the No FEAR Act so many years ago.
  I support this legislation which ensures agencies effectively 
implement their Equal Employment Opportunity, or EEO, programs and that 
Federal employees are never prevented from disclosing discriminatory or 
wasteful actions to Congress, the office of special counsel, or 
inspectors general.
  How important is that? We have a history of addressing workplace 
equality, and that is why I sponsored similar legislation with the No 
FEAR Act, which was first introduced in Congress in 2002. This was 
previous legislation that had a sense of Congress provision, whereas 
this particular legislation further strengthens the responsibilities 
and rights of employees.
  The No FEAR Act set the precedent for imposing additional duties upon 
Federal agency employers, intended to reinvigorate their longstanding 
obligation to provide a work environment free of discrimination and 
retaliation.
  On October 2, 2000, the House Science Committee held a hearing 
dealing with actions at one of our agencies. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo 
had been in my office repeatedly. I mention her name because of her 
continued vigilance in speaking about issues dealing with 
whistleblowers. In actuality, this one involved a $600,000 jury 
decision against the EPA for race and sex discrimination under title 
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  As we all listened in this hearing, it was clear that what we wanted 
to do was prevent retaliation, which we see in this legislation here 
today. I am grateful that we now have a roadmap for dealing with 
individuals who want only the best for our government.
  I can give some of the names as an example: Mark Felt, the FBI agent 
known as Deep Throat during the Watergate scandal of the 1970s; Frank 
Serpico, a New York police officer who confronted his department for 
the rampant corruption the leadership let take place; Jeffrey Wigand, a 
tobacco executive who admitted that tobacco companies knew they were 
putting addictive chemicals into their cigarettes; and, of course, 
Sherron Watkins, an executive of the Enron Corporation.
  Of course, these individuals come from different walks of life, but 
the whole idea is to make sure that we, as Members of Congress, 
recognize that whistleblower activities or actions are clearly a part 
of good government.
  According to the 2014 Federal employee viewpoint survey, only 60 
percent of Federal employees agreed that they could ``disclose a 
suspected violation of any law, rule, or regulation without fear of 
reprisal.''
  I know that your committee, Mr. Chaffetz and Mr. Cummings, is really 
the front line of providing this forum; and I am glad to be able to 
join you as a member of the Homeland Security Committee and Judiciary 
Committee to, again, emphasize the importance of safe and 
discrimination-free workplaces.
  I am grateful, again, to have had the opportunity firsthand to listen 
to at least one of our whistleblowers who only wanted to be able to 
help establish a workplace that was free of discrimination and fear.
  Again, I want to make mention of Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, a dedicated 
Federal employee who worked so very hard.

                     [From NPR.org, Sept. 6, 2011]

                High Price of Blowing the Whistle on EPA

       Marsha Coleman-Adebayo earned a doctoral degree from the 
     Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and worked with the 
     United Nations before joining the Environmental Protection 
     Agency in 1990. During her time at the U.N., she also 
     developed an expertise in African developmental issues.
       During her tenure at the EPA, Coleman-Adebayo says she 
     requested that the agency devote attention to environmental 
     problems in South Africa that were allegedly caused by an 
     American company. She says that the agency reneged on 
     promises to investigate the matter, and the harder she pushed 
     for change, the more she faced a backlash from her superiors.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I make mention that we passed the No 
FEAR Act with a number of Members.
  As we have noted a number of whistleblowers who were actually Persons 
of the Year on Time Magazine, I join my colleagues in supporting the 
present underlying legislation and ask all Members to support this 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original co-sponsor and strong 
support of H.R. 1557, the ``Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 
2015.''
  I support this legislation because it ensures agencies effectively 
implement their Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) programs and

[[Page 11808]]

that federal employees are never prevented from disclosing 
discriminatory or wasteful actions to Congress, the Office of Special 
Counsel, or Inspectors General.
  Let me express my thanks to Ranking Member Cummings for introducing 
this critical legislation that is essential to ensuring that our 
federal workplaces are free from discrimination, and that any barriers 
impeding fairness in personnel decisions are identified and eliminated.
  We have a history of addressing workplace equality and that is why I 
sponsored similar legislation when the No Fear Act was first introduced 
to Congress in 2002.
  The No Fear Act set the precedent for imposing additional duties upon 
Federal agency employers intended to reinvigorate their longstanding 
obligation to provide a work environment free of discrimination and 
retaliation.
  If you would allow me I would like to put a face on this problem.
  On October 2, 2000, the House Science Committee held a hearing 
entitled ``Intolerance at EPA--Harming People, Harming Science?''
  Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, an EPA whistleblower, won a $600,000 jury 
decision against EPA for race and sex discrimination under title VII of 
the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  During that hearing, then-chairman of the Science Committee 
Congressman Sensenbrenner illuminated the dangerous precedent set by 
the EPA, stating, ``While EPA has a clear policy on dealing with 
employees that discriminate, harass and retaliate against other EPA 
employees, no one apparently involved in the Coleman-Adebayo or Nolan 
cases have yet to be disciplined by EPA.''
  Mr. Speaker, no employee should fear voicing their concerns in 
reference to a safer, more work conducive environment.
  We often look at individuals or groups who step forward as 
whistleblowers.
  This term has been used with a negative connotation to describe 
insubordinate employees, but history has shown us that whistleblowers 
are often heroes that have shed light on employers' illegal practices 
and as a result made the workplace better for future employees.
  Mark Felt, the FBI agent known as deep throat during the Watergate 
Scandal of the 1970s.
  Frank Serpico, New York police officer who confronted his department 
for the rampant corruption the leadership let take place.
  Jeffrey Wigand, a tobacco executive who admitted that tobacco 
companies knew they were putting addictive chemicals into their 
cigarettes.
  And Sherron Watkins, an executive of the Enron corporation who was 
vital in exposing the financial lies and frauds of the company.
  All these individuals stood up against well-established corporations 
and agencies even when others doubted their claims.
  We must protect these types of acts in Federal offices and 
successfully implement the Equal Employment Opportunity Programs (EEO).
  Mr. Speaker, in a sense every Member of Congress is a whistleblower 
for the people in that uncovering and correcting problems in the 
agencies that administer the laws is an essential part of our oversight 
responsibilities.
  According to the 2014 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, only 60 
percent of federal employees agreed that they could quote, ``disclose a 
suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation without fear of 
reprisal.''
  We must do better and ensure employees have confidence that they can 
report an act of discrimination without suffering retaliation.
  Employees need to know that EEO reports will be thoroughly, fairly, 
and timely investigated and adjudicated.
  H.R. 1557 would require that EEO programs operate independently of an 
agency's human resources or general counsel offices.
  This bill requires the head of the program report directly to the 
head of an agency and the act would prohibit the use of non-disclosure 
agreements that restrict an employee from disclosing to Congress, the 
Office of Special Counsel, or instance of waste, fraud or abuse.
  As a senior member of the Committees on Homeland Security and the 
Judiciary, and as Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on 
Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I understand 
the importance of safe and discrimination free workplaces.
  In conclusion, let me express my appreciation again to Ranking Member 
Cummings for introducing this legislation and Chairman Chaffetz for 
shepherding this bill to the floor.
  By strengthening existing requirements to ensure federal EEO programs 
meet high standards, we are implementing the best practices available 
to combat workplace discrimination.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, again, we urge the House to vote in favor of this very 
important legislation. It is bipartisan and does address issues that 
are of concern to all of us.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I simply want to thank those 
Members who have worked hard on this bill. One that is of special note 
is Congressman Sean Duffy of Wisconsin. He has done great work on this, 
particularly trying to hold people accountable at Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau for the EEOC issues there.
  This bill would not be a reality without Mr. Cummings. We thank him 
for his leadership on this. I am proud to support it. I think all the 
Members in this body should support it. It does further the protections 
for employees. It makes government better and more responsible.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 1557, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 1557.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________