Yesterday I had the opportunity (along with my fellow Shipman & Goodwin partner Peter Murphy) to speak as part of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities’ (CHRO) 75th Anniversary celebration.
The panel — The Barriers to Employment Legal Update and Panel Discussion — was chock full of the types of insights, data and analyses that is so often overlooked in this Twitter generation.
We spent a good 90 minutes talking about the changes that have been going on at the CHRO and talked about what types of changes could be made in the future.
Frankly, it’s far too much for one blog post.
So I’m going to tackle them in a few posts. Today’s post: The re-emergence of the Case Assessment Review.
Indeed, if you haven’t been before the CHRO in the last year, you may be unaware that this is perhaps one of the biggest changes to the agency procedure over the last year.
Hyperbole? Actually no. At least not when you look at the statistics regarding CAR. (I did a deep dive into CAR last December which I’d strongly recommend if you want to learn more.)
Since the Legal Division has taken over this task — which is, in essence, a gatekeeping function — the dismissal rate has increased to 23% (up from just 5%). Or, put another way, just 77% of cases are getting retained for mediation and investigation, down from 95% just a year ago.
This has big implications on how employers should view the CHRO process. No longer is it the case that nearly all cases will get retained for investigation; as a result, position statements should play a greater role in telling the story.
The panel discussed other strategic implications of the numbers as well. Suffice to say, employers who are still viewing the CHRO in terms of 2015 (where I humbly suggested the CHRO Complaint process needed a reboot) are missing out on the changes happening right now. Attorneys and their clients need to definitely stay up to speed with the latest developments.
What else is new? More on that in an upcoming post….
The post CHRO Turns 75 … and Looks to the Future appeared first on Connecticut Employment Law Blog.
Comments
Post a Comment