New York State Association for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey Brief Amici Curiae
Public Court Documents
June 29, 1983

Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Loeffler v. Tisch Brief Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner, 1987. cc4c2e7f-bb9a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/8760b486-3b70-406c-844b-0f253767cfed/loeffler-v-tisch-brief-amicus-curiae-in-support-of-petitioner. Accessed April 30, 2025.
Copied!
No. 86-1431 '<-/ L $72>A"' I s r t h e Buptm? (Emtrt nf % Inttpii Status October Teem, 1987 T heodore J. L oeppler, vs. Petitioner, P reston R. T isch, Postmaster General of tlie United States, Respondent. ON W R IT OE CERTIORARI TO T H E U N IT E D STATES COURT OP A PPEALS POR T H E E IG H T H CIRCU IT BRIEF OF THE NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC., AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER J ulius L eV onne Chambers Gail J. W right* Charles Stephen R alston 16th Floor 99 Hudson Street New York, New York 10013 (212) 219-1900 Attorneys for Amicus Curiae NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. ^Counsel of Record QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the United States Postal Service, created by an act of Congress in 1970 and therein authorized "to sue and be sued," 39 U.S.C. 401(1), is immunized against an award of pre-judgment interest in a suit brought pursuant to the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq. l Table of Contents Page Question Presented ................. i Table of Authorities............... ii Interest of Amicus Curiae ........... 1 Summary of Argument ................. 3 Argument ............................ 5 Introduction ................... 5 I. "Sue And Be Sued" Clauses Raise A Strong Presumption Of Waiver of Sovereign Immunity ................. 8 II. Congress Intended Postal Service Employees To Be Treated Like Employees In Private Firms ............. 27 III. The Inclusion of The Postal Service In Section 717 Did Not Diminish The Rights of Postal Employees ........... 31 Conclusion............................3 6 ii Table of Authorities Cases: Page Airco Speer Carbon-Graphite v. Local 502, Int'l Union of Elec., Radio and Machine Workers of America, AFL-CIO, 479 F. Supp. 246 (W.D. Penn. 1979) . ............. 25 Asheville Mica Co. v. CCC, 239 F. Supp. 383 (S.D.N.Y. 1965) aff'd 360 F.2d 931 (2d Cir. 1966) . . . 23 Brown V. GSA, 425 U.S. 820 (1976) . . 35 Citizens Savings Bank v. Bell, 605 F. Supp. 1033 (D.R.I. 1985) . . 24 Cross v. United States Postal Service, 733 F .2d 1327 (8th Cir. 1984) . 23 Davis v. Jobs for Progress, Inc., 427 F. Supp. 479 (D. Ariz. 1976) 31 Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F .2d 1208 (8th Cir. 1981) cert, denied. 454 U.S. 968 (1981) 26 Eazor Exp. Inc. v. International Bro. of Teamsters, 520 F.2d 951 (3d Cir. 1975) cert, denied, 424 U.S. 935 (1976) rehearing denied. 425 U.S. 908 (1976)................. 25 FCIC V . DeCell, 76 So.2d 826 (S.Ct. Miss. 1955) ............... 23 Federal Housing Administration v. Barr, 309 U.S. 242 (1940) . . 20, 21 iii Ferguson v. Union National Bank of Clarksburg, W. Va., 126 F.2d 753 (4th Cir. 1 9 4 2 ) .............. .24 Franchise Tax Board v. United States Postal Service, 467 U.S. 512 (1984).......................... 21 Green v. United States Steel Corp., 640 F. Supp. 1521 (E.D. Pa. 1 9 8 6 ) ............................ 31 In Re Townsend, 348 F. Supp. 1284 (W.D. Mo. 1 9 7 2 ) .................. 25 Industrial Indemnity Inc. v. Landrieu, 615 F.2d 644 (5th Cir. 1 9 8 0 ) ..................... 24 Keifer & Keifer v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 306 U.S. 381 (1939) 8 Kennedy Elec. Co., Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 508 F. 2d 954 (10th Cir. 1974) . . . . 6 Loeffler v. Tisch, 806 F.2d 817 (8th Cir. 1 9 8 6 ) ................. 23 McCarty v. Gault, 24 F. Supp. 977 (D. Or. 1 9 3 8 ) ................. 25 McCauley v. Thygerson, 732 F.2d 978 (D.C. Cir. 1984) . 15 Milner v. Bolger, 546 F. Supp. 375 (E.D. Cal. 1 9 8 2 ) ................ 22 Muday v. Cleaver, 590 F. Supp. 1209 (W.D. Mich. 1 9 8 4 ) ............... 30 iv Nagy v. United States Postal Service, 773 F .2d 1190 (11th Cir. 1985) . National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers v. Parrish, 229 U.S. 494 (1913)................... 6 > New York Guardian Mortgage Corp. v. Cleland, 473 F. Supp. 422 (S.D.N.Y. 1979) ........ . . . North N.Y. Savings Bank v. FSLIC, 515 F .2d 1355 (D.C. Cir. 1975) . . . Queen v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 689 F .2d 80 (6th Cir. 1982) . . • R & R Farm Enterprises v. FCIC, 788 F .2d 1148 (5th Cir. 1986) . . . . Short v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund, 729 F .2d 567 (8th Cir. 1984) . . Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 269 U.S. 76 (1925) ............. Stearns v. Veterans of Foreign Wars, 394 F. Supp. 138 (D.D.C. 1975) . . . . . ............... Taylor v. Phillips Industries, Inc., 593 F .2d 783 (7th Cir. 1979) . . United States v. Parkside Court, Inc. 257 F. Supp. 177 (D.N.J. 1966) aff'd 376 F .2d 853 (3d Cir. 1967) .......................... Van Lusch v. Hoffmaster, 253 F. Supp. 633 (D. Md. 1966) ............. 22 25 24 23 23 26 15 12 31 r . 24 . 21 22 V Statutes 7 U.S.C. § 942 ....................... 13 7 U.S.C. § 1506 ..................... 13 7 U.S.C. § 1507(a).................... 16 11 U.S.C. § 323 ( b ) .................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 2 4 ( 4 ) .............. 13 12 U.S.C. § 197(b)............... 12, 26 12 U.S.C. § 341(4).................... 12 12 U.S.C. § 341(5).................... 15 12 U.S.C. § 6 1 4 ....................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 635(a) ( 1 ) .................13 12 U.S.C. § 1432 ( a ) ................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 1439 .................. 15 12 U.S.C. § 1452 (b)(7)............ 13 12 U.S.C. § 1702 .................. 13 12 U.S.C. § 1723a ( a ) .............. 13 12 U.S.C. § 1723a ( d ) .............. 16 12 U.S.C. § 1725(c) ( 4 ) ............ 13 12 U.S.C. § 1725(C)(5)............ 15 12 U.S.C. § 1757(2).............. 13 5 U.S.C. § 2 1 0 5 ( e ) ...................... 27 vi 12 U.S.C. § 1789(a)(2)............ 13 12 U.S.C. § 1 7 9 5 f ..................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 1819(4)................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 1819(5)................... 15 12 U.S.C. § 2012(4)................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 2033 ( 4 ) ................ 13 12 U.S.C. § 2072 ................... 13 12 U.S.C. § 2093 ( 4 ) .............. 13 12 U.S.C. § 2093 ( 1 7 ) .............. 15 12 U.S.C. § 2216f (a) ( 3 ) .......... 15 12 U.S.C. § 2216f (a) ( 7 ) .......... 13 12 U.S.C. § 2216f ( c ) .............. 15 12 U.S.C. § 2122(4).............. 13 12 U.S.C. § 2252 (a) ( 1 3 ) ...............13 12 U.S.C. § 2289(1)................ 13 12 U.S.C. § 2289(8)................ 15 12 U.S.C. § 3012(3) 16 12 U.S.C. § 3012(6)................... 13 15 U.S.C. § 77dd .. ................ 16 15 U.S.C. § 78ccc (b) ( 1 ) ...............14 12 U.S.C. § 1766(b) ( 3 ) .............. 13 vii 15 U.S.C. § 146(c)................ 16 15 U.S.C. § 1 5 6 ....................... 17 15 U.S.C. § 504 ( b ) ................ 17 15 U.S.C. § 634 ( a ) ................ 16 15 U.S.C. § 634 (b) ( 1 ) ................. 14 15 U.S.C. § 714b ( c ) ................... 14 15 U.S.C. § 7 1 4 h ................... 16 16 U.S.C. § 19i ... ....................17 16 U.S.C. § 468 (c) ( b ) ................. 17 16 U.S.C. § 8 3 1 b ................... 19 16 U.S.C. § 1103(c)................... 17 16 U.S.C. § 831c ( b ) ................... 17 16 U.S.C. § 1103(d)................... 18 16 U.S.C. § 3702 (g)(2)(a).............18 16 U.S.C. § 3703 (c)(5)............ 17 19 U.S.C. § 2350 ................... 14 20 U.S.C. § 1082 (a) ( 2 ) ............ 14 20 U.S.C. § 1087-2 (i) ( 1 ) .......... 14 20 U.S.C. § 1132d-l(b) ( 2 ) ..............14 20 U.S.C. § 1132g-l(c) ( 2 ) ..............14 15 U.S.C. § 78ccc(b) ( 7 ) ................ 16 viii 20 U.S.C. § 4303 (b)(4)............ 18 20 U.S.C. § 4414(3)................... 17 20 U.S.C. § 4416(a)................... 18 20 U.S.C. § 4465(d)(7)............ 18 20 U.S.C. § 4665(d) ( 3 ) ............ 17 22 U.S.C. § 290(f) (e)(5).......... 17 22 U.S.C. § 290f (e) ( 1 0 ) ...............17 22 U.S.C. § 290h-4 (a) ( 2 ) .......... 17 22 U.S.C. § 290h—4(a)(7).......... 19 22 U.S.C. § 2199(d)................... 14 22 U.S.C. § 3303 (b) ( 7 ) ............ 17 22 U.S.C. § 4604 (j) ................... 17 22 U.S.C. § 4606(b) 19 25 U.S.C. § 505 ..................... 17 25 U.S.C. § 1496(a) . 14 25 U.S.C. § 1725(d)(1)............ 18 26 U.S.C. § 501(c) ( 4 ) ................. 10 28 U.S.C. § 754 ..................... 14 28 U.S.C. § 2679 ................... 18 29 U.S.C. § 185(b)................. 26 20 U.S.C. § 4302 ( a ) .....................17 IX 29 U.S.C. § 205(a)................. y 29 U.S.C. § 402 ( e ) ................. 29 29 U.S.C. § 1132(d)(1)...........14, 26 29 U.S.C. § 1302 (b)(1)................. 14 29 U.S.C. § 1302 (b) ( 6 ) ................. 14 33 U.S.C. § 984 (a) ( 3 ) .................. 17 33 U.S.C. § 984 (a) ( 7 ) .................. I9 33 U.S.C. § 1517(f) ( 1 ) ............. 14 36 U.S.C. § 2 ....................... 9 36 U.S.C. S 2 0 c ............. 9 36 U.S.C. § 2 2 ........................... 9 36 U.S.C. § 3 2 ........................ 9 36 U.S.C. § 4 6 ..........................11 36 U.S.C. § 5 7 b ...................... 9 36 U.S.C. § 6 3 ...........................9 36 U.S.C. § 67j . . . . .................. 11 36 U.S.C. § 78c(4)......................1° 36 U.S.C. § .......................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 78j ..................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 8 6 ..................... ' 11 36 U.S.C. § 90f ..................' • • X1 x 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 10 11 9 9 11 10 11 11 9 11 11 11 11 10 11 11 10 11 11 10 11 u.s.c. § 96 . . u.s.c. § 98 . . u.s.c. § 114 . . u.s.c. § 140b(c) u.s.c. §§t 230, 2 u.s.c. § 274 (3) u.s.c. § 280 . . u.s.c. § 281 . . u.s.c. § 314 ( j ) u.s.c. § 342 . . u.s.c. § 346 . . u.s.c. § 376 . . u.s.c. § 411 . . u.s.c. § 434 (3) u.s.c. § 440 . . u.s.c. § 441 . . u.s.c. § 464 (3) u.s.c. § 471 . . u.s.c. § 472 . . u.s.c. § 504(3) u.s.c. § 510 . . xi 36 U.S.C. § 5 4 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 542 .................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 580 .................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 5 8 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 604(4)................. 10 36 U.S.C. § 640 ................ 11 36 U.S.C. § 6 4 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 664(3)................ 10 36 U.S.C. § 670 ..................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 6 7 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 694(4) . 10 36 U.S.C. § 700 ..................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 7 0 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 764 ( 4 ) .................. 10 36 U.S.C. § 7 7 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 772 .................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 800 .................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 8 0 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 830 ..................... 11 xii 36 U.S.C. § 5 3 4 ( 4 ) .................. 10 36 U.S.C. § 860 ........................ 11 36 U.S.C. § 8 6 1 ........................ 11 36 U.S.C. § 884 ( 4 ) .................... 10 36 U.S.C. § 890 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 8 9 1 .................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 944(4).................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 950 ....................... li 36 U.S.C. § 9 5 1 ....................... ll 36 U.S.C. § 974(4).................. H 36 U.S.C. § 980 ...................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 9 8 1 ....................... 11 36 U.S.C. § 1 0 1 1 .................... 12 36 U.S.C. § 1 0 1 2 .................... 12 36 U.S.C. § 1044 ( 4 ) ................. 10 36 U.S.C. § 1050 ................. 12 36 U.S.C. § 1 0 5 1 ................... .12 36 U.S.C. § 1074 ( 3 ) ................. 10 36 U.S.C. § 1080 .................... 12 36 U.S.C. § 1 0 8 1 ......................12 36 U.S.C. § 1101 ................... 10 36 U.S.C. § 8 3 1 ........................... 11 xiii 36 U.S.C. § 1 1 0 3 .................. y 36 U.S.C. § 1 1 5 6 .................. 12 36 U.S.C. § 1 1 6 5 .................. 12 36 U.S.C. § 1210 .................. 11 36 U.S.C. § 1 2 1 9 ................... 10 36 U.S.C. § 1304 ................... 12 36 U.S.C. § 3304 ................... 12 36 U.S.C. § 3 4 1 0 .................. 12 36 U.S.C. § 3 4 1 1 .................. 12 36 U.S.C. § 3608(d)............... 12 36 U.S.C. § 3609 .................. 12 36 U.S.C. § 3 6 1 4 ................... 10 38 U.S.C. § 1820(a)(1)............ 14 39 U.S.C. § 1 0 1 ....................... 28 39 U.S.C. § 401(1)................ 17 39 U.S.C. § 409(e)................ 7 39 U.S.C. § 1 0 0 1 .................. 6 39 U.S.C. § 1002 .................. 6 39 U.S.C. § 1003 .................. 29 39 U.S.C. § 1004 .................. 6 39 U.S.C. § 1005 .................. 28 xiv 39 U.S.C. § 1208 ( e ) .............. 18 39 U.S.C. § 1209 ................... 29 39 U.S.C. § 2401(b) ( 1 ) ............ 7 40 U.S.C. § 875(4)................ 17 42 U.S.C. § 294h(a) ( 2 ) ............ 14 42 U.S.C. § 1 4 0 4 a ................. 14 42 U.S.C. § 1456(c) ( 1 ) ............ 14 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2................... 30 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 ( a ) ...............30 42 U.S.C. § 3211(11) . 14 42 U.S.C. § 8104(a) 16 42 U.S.C. § 8105(b)(4) . . . . . . . 14 42 U.S.C. § 8771(a) ( 4 ) ............ 14 43 U.S.C. § 1653 (c) ( 4 ) ............ 14 43 U.S.C. § 1812(a)................... 14 43 U.S.C. § 1842 (a) ( 4 ) ............ 15 45 U.S.C. § 822 (c) ( 5 ) .................14 48 U.S.C. § 733 .................... 17 Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, Section 7 0 1 ................... 32 39 U.S.C. § 1202 ..................... 6 xv Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, Section 7 1 7 ............ 31 Other Authorities: H.R. Rep. No. 1104, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)............. 5, 7 116 Cong. Rec. 22279 (1970) . . . . 33 116 Cong. Rec. 26956 (1970) . . . . 33 116 Cong. Rec. 26957 (1970).......... 35 116 Cong. Rec. 27597 (1970) . . . 34, 35 xv i NO. 86-1431 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 1987 THEODORE J. LOEFFLER, Petitioner, vs. PRESTON R. TISCH, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT BRIEF OF THE NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER Interest of Amicus Curiae1 The NAACP Legal Defense and 1Letters consenting to the filing of this Brief on behalf of the petitioner and the. respondent are on file with the Clerk of Court. 2 Educational Fund, Inc. is a non-profit corporation that was established for the purpose of assisting black citizens in securing their constitutional and civil rights. Its attorneys have represented parties and participated as amicus curiae in numerous cases before this Court involving various facets of the law. The Legal Defense Fund has a particular interest in the question before the Court in the present case because of its representation of employees of the United States Postal Service in a number of actions brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. United States Postal Service Board__of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711 (1983); Chisholm v. United States Postal Service, 3 665 F . 2d 482 (4th Cir. 1981); Griffin v. Carlin. 755 F.2d 1516 (11th Cir. 1985). The last of these cases is yet to be resolved, and the right of the members of the plaintiff class to be fully compensated for denials of promotions that allegedly violated Title VII will be resolved by the decision in the present case. Summary of Argument I. For many years "sue and be sued" clauses have been broadly interpreted by this Court to effect general waivers of sovereign immunity. Thus, as long ago as 1913 the Court held that pre-judgment interest could be awarded against a federally-chartered corporation closely analogous to the Postal Service. The lower courts have similarly permitted 4 such awards against a number of the many c o r p o r a t i o n s and agencies whose authorizing statutes include a "sue and be sued" clause. II. When it passed the Postal Service Reorganization Act, Congress clearly intended Postal Service employees to be treated, with a few exceptions, like employees in private firms. Thus, they do not come within the civil service system under Title 5 of the United States Code and they come under the auspices of the National Labor Relations Board. Therefore, to disallow such employees pre-judgment interest on back pay awards would place them in a disfavored position vis-a-vis other employees. III. When Congress included the Postal 5 Service under Section 717 of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 it did not intend to diminish the rights of Postal Service employees to be treated as employees in the private sector. In 1970, Congress only intended that Postal Service employees have the benefit of what were then perceived to be the superior procedures for administrative resolution of EEO complaints afforded by the Civil Service Commission. ARGUMENT Introduction The United States Postal Service was created out of the old Postal Department by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, with the intention of creating efficient and economical mail service.2 This was 2 H.R. Rep. No. 1104, 91st Cong., 2d Sess., (1970) reprinted in 1970 U.S. Code Cong. & Admin. News 3649, 3650. Hereinafter House Report. 6 accomplished in several ways, including making the Postal Service independent of politics3 and the restructuring of the organization in a more business-like manner.4 5 One important aspect of the new Postal Service is that it is to be financially independent of the federal government.̂ House Report, at 3659. 3 Id.; 39 U.S.C. § 1002 (1980). 4 For example, the management of the Post Office was reorganized to be more business-like. House Report, at 3660; 39 U.S.C. §§ 1001(c), 1004. Executives, although not politically appointed, cannot be included in a collective bargaining unit. 39 U.S.C. § 1202(1). 5 If the funds from a suit would be taken from the United States Treasury, then sovereign immunity usually applies. But see National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers v. Parrish, 229 U.S. 494 (1913). But where an organization has been empowered to sue and be sued, and the judgment is paid out of the organization's own funds, then sovereign immunity may not be a bar. Kennedy Elec. Co.. Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 508 F.2d 954 (10th Cir. 1974). 7 This extends to any "judgment against the Government of the United States arising out of activities of the Postal Service" since it must be "paid by the Postal Service out of any funds available to the Postal Service." 39 U.S.C. 409(e). As much as the Congress wished the Postal Service to be business-like and independent of the government, it could not be entirely freed from its previous role because of the importance of mail delivery in the United States. For this reason the prohibition against strikes was applied to Postal employees,6 and the federal government subsidizes the Postal Service to the extent that it is mandated to operate inefficient Post Offices. 39 U.S.C. § 2401(b) (1) . 6 House Report, at 3662. 8 "SUE AND BE SUED" CLAUSES RAISE A STRONG PRESUMPTION OF WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY The words "sue and be sued" do not have a magical meaning since Congress can situate a federal entity into the private marketplace such that sovereign immunity is waived even though the organization lacks a "sue and be sued" clause. Keifer. & Keifer v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 306 U.S. 381 (1939). However, Congress's selective use of the clause has created a family of organizations which are primarily private in nature. When Congress placed the Postal Service within this family in 1970, it intended the Service to be treated like other private organizations. The phrase "sue and be sued" is I. 9 found 124 times in the U.S. Code Annotated, and a review of these statutes indicates that these organizations ŵ ere meant to be on the same footing as their private sector counterparts. The largest category of these statutes are those creating Patriotic Societies in Title 36 of the U.S. Code.7 These societies are c o n s i d e r e d private c o r p o r a t i o n s established under federal law. 36 U.S.C. § 1101. Although these corporations must submit reports to Congress,8 and many are 7 In addition to the statutes listed in footnotes 8-11, see 36 U.S.C. § 2 (American National Red Cross); 36 U.S.C. § 20c (Sons of the American Revolution); 36 U.S.C. § 22 (Boy Scouts of America); 36 U.S.C. § 32 (Girl Scouts of America) ; 36 U.S.C. § 57b (Marine Corps League); 36 U.S.C. § 63 (Belleau Wood Memorial Association); 36 U.S.C. § 114 (Veterans of Foreign Wars) ; 36 U.S.C. § 140b(c) (Service Clubs); 36 U.S.C. § 205(a) (Civil Air Patrol); 36 U.S.C. 314 (j) (Military Chaplains Association) . 8 36 U.S.C. § 1103 (1980). 10 tax-exempt,9 they are able to choose employees as they require,10 they are non-political, and they are liable for 9 36 U.S.C. § 96 (American War Mothers); 36 U.S.C. § 1219 (United States Capitol Historical Society); 36 U.S.C. § 3 6 1 4 ( P e a r l H a r b o r S u r v i v o r s Association) ; and see generally, 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(4). 10 36 U.S.C. § 78c (4) (Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic); 36 U.S.C. § 274(3) (Future Farmers of America); 36 U.S.C. § 434(3) (National Conference on Citizenship); 36 U.S.C. § 464(3) (National Safety Council); 36 U.S.C. § 504(3) (Board for Fundamental Education); 36 U.S.C. § 534(4) (Sons of Union Veterans); 36 U.S.C. § 604(4) (National Fund for Medical Education); 36 U.S.C. § 664(3) (National Music Council); 36 U.S.C. § 694(4) (Boys' Clubs of America); 36 U.S.C. § 764(4) (Veterans of World War I of the United States of America); 36 U.S.C. § 884(4) (Big Brothers— Big Sisters of America); 36 U.S.C. § 944(4) (Blue Star Mothers); 36 U.S.C. § 974(4) (Agricultural Hall of Fame); 36 U.S.C. § 1044(4) (Naval Sea Cadets); 36 U.S.C. § 1074(3) (Little League Baseball, Inc.); 36 U.S.C. § 3404(4) (American Symphony Orchestra League). 11 the actions of their officers.11 On the 11 36 U.S.C. § 46 (American Legion); 36 U.S.C. § 67j (AMVETS) ; 36 U.S.C. §§ 78 i, 78j (Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic); 36 U.S.C. § 86 (United States Blind Veterans of World War I); 36 U.S.C. § 90f (Disabled Army Veterans); 36 U.S.C. § 98 (American War Mothers); 36 U.S.C. §§ 230, 232 (Reserve Officers Association); 36 U.S.C. §§ 280, 281 (Future Farmers of America); 36 U.S.C. §§ 342, 346 (American Society of International Law); 36 U.S.C. § 376 (United States Olympic Committee); 36 U.S.C. § 411 (Conference of State Societies, Washington, D.C.); 36 U.S.C. §§ 440, 441 (National Conference on Citizenship); 36 U.S.C. §§ 471, 472 (National Safety Council); 36 U.S.C. §§ 510, 511 (Board for Fundamental Education); 36 U.S.C. §§ 541, 542 (Sons of Union Veterans); 36 U.S.C. §§ 580, 581 (Foundation of the Federal Bar Association); 36 U.S.C. §§ 640, 641 (Legion of Valor); 36 U.S.C. §§ 670, 671 (National Music Council); 36 U.S.C. §§ 700, 701 (Boys' Clubs of America); 36 U.S.C. §§ 771, 772 (Veterans of World War I); 36 U.S.C. §§ 800, 801 (Congressional Medal of Honor Society); 36 U.S.C. §§ 830, 831 (Military Order of the Purple Heart); 36 U.S.C. §§ 860, 861 (Blinded Veterans Association); 36 U.S.C. §§ 890, 891 (Big Brothers--Big Sisters of America); 36 U.S.C. §§ 919, 920 (Jewish War Veterans); 36 U.S.C. §§ 950, 951 (Blue Star Mothers); 36 U.S.C. §§ 980, 981 (Agricultural Hall of Fame); 36 12 whole, these patriotic societies are not considered a part of the government. In Stearns v. Veterans of Foreign Wars, 394 F.Supp. 138 (D.D.C. 1975), for example, the court held that a discriminatory membership policy does not implicate state action although Congress created the VFW and its membership requirements. The next largest group of statutes concern banks, insurance, loans, U.S.C. §§ 1011, 1012 (National Woman's Relief Corps, Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic); 36 U.S.C. §§ 1050, 1051 (Naval Sea Cadets); 36 U.S.C. §§ 1080, 1081 (Little League Baseball, Inc.); 36 U.S.C. §§ 1156, 1165 (Paralyzed Veterans of America); 36 U.S.C. § 1210 (United States Capitol Historical Society); 36 U . S . C . § 1304 (United Service Organizations); 36 U.S.C. § 3304 (American National Theater and Academy); 36 U.S.C. §§ 3410, 3411 (American Symphony Orchestra League); 36 U.S.C. §§ 3608(d), 3609 (Pearl Harbor Survivors Association). 13 investments, and receivers.12 In 12 Rural Telephone Bank, 7 U.S.C. § 942; Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, 7 U.S.C. § 1506; bankruptcy trustees, 11 U.S.C. § 323(b); national banks, 12 U.S.C. § 24(4); receivers of national banks, 12 U.S.C. § 197(b); Federal Reserve Banks, 12 U.S.C. § 341(4); corporations which do international or foreign banking, 12 U.S.C. § 614; Export- Import Bank of Washington, 12 U.S.C. § 635(a)(1); Federal Home Loan Banks, 12 U.S.C. § 1432(a); Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, 12 U.S.C. § 1 4 5 2 (b) (7) ; H o u s i n g and Urban Development, 12 U.S.C. § 1702; Government National Mortgage Association and Federal National Mortgage Association, 12 U.S.C. § 1723a(a); Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, 12 U.S.C. § 1725(c)(4); federally chartered credit unions, 12 U.S.C. § 1757(2); National Credit Union Administration Board, 12 U.S.C. §§ 1766(b)(3), 1789(a)(2), 1795f; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 12 U.S.C. § 1819(4); Federal Land Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 2012(4); federal land bank associations, 12 U.S.C. § 2033(4); Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, 12 U.S.C. § 2072; Production Credit Associations, 12 U.S.C. § 2093(4); banks for cooperatives, 12 U.S.C. § 2122(4); Farm Credit System Capital Corporation, 12 U.S.C. § 2216f(a)(7); Farm Credit Administration, 12 U.S.C. § 2252 (a) (13); Federal Financing Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 2289(1); National Consumer Cooperative Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 3012(6); Securities 14 Investor Protection Corporation, 15 U.S.C. § 78ccc(b)(1); Small Business Administration, 15 U.S.C. § 634(b)(1); Commodity Credit Corporation, 15 U.S.C. § 714b(c); Secretary of Commerce (loans to private firms), 19 U.S.C. § 2350; Secretary of Education (student loans), 20 U.S.C. § 1082(a)(2); Student Loan Marketing Association, 20 U.S.C. § 1087- 2(i)(l); Secretary of Education (loans for building educational facilities), §§ 20 U.S.C. § 1132d-l(b) (2) , 1132g- 1(c)(2); Overseas Private Investment Corporation, 22 U.S.C. § 2199(d); Secretary of the Interior (loans to Indian organizations), 25 U.S.C. § 1496(a); property receivers in different district courts, 28 U.S.C. § 754; ERISA benefit plans, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(d)(1); Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, 29 U.S.C. § 1302(b)(1); Deep Water Liability Fund, 33 U.S.C. § 1517(f)(1); VA Administrator (home loans), 38 U.S.C. § 1820(a)(1); Secretary of HHS (loans to graduate students in the health professions), 42 U.S.C. § 294h(a)(2); United States Housing Authority, 42 U.S.C. § 1404a; Secretary of HHS (urban renewal loans), 42 U.S.C. § 1456(c)(1); Secretary of HHS (public works loans), 42 U.S.C. § 3211(11); Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, 42 U.S.C. § 8105(b)(4); United States Synthetic Fuels Corporation, 42 U.S.C. § 8771(a)(4); Trans Alaska Pipeline Fund, 43 U.S.C. § 1653(c)(4); Offshore Oil Pollution Compensation Fund, 43 U.S.C. § 1812(a); 15 general, these organizations are proprietary, and are meant to be as liable as their private counterparts. See e.g. Standard Oil Co. v. United States. 269 U.S. 76 (1925). In terms of employment p olicy, most of these organizations fall outside of the Civil Service system,* 13 such that the employees Fishermen's Contingency Fund, 43 U.S.C. § 1842(a)(4); Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Fund, 45 U.S.C. § 822(c)(5). 13 Within the statutory framework of an organization, the Code does not always specify the status of its employees. The status has been specified in the following organizations. Not in Civil Service; Federal Reserve Banks, 12 U.S.C. § 341(5); Federal Home Loan Banks, 12 U.S.C. § 1439; Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, McCauley v. Thygerson. 732 F.2d 978 (D.C. Cir. 1984); FSLIC, 12 U.S.C. § 1725(c)(5); FDIC, 12 U.S.C. § 1819(5); Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, 12 U.S.C. § 2072(15); Production Credit Associations, 12 U.S.C. § 2093(17); Farm Credit System Capital Corporation, 12 U.S.C. §§ 2216f(a)(3), 2216f(c); Federal Financing Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 2289(8); National Consumer 16 are treated like employees in the private sector. The remainder of the "sue and be sued" statutes contain a variety of organizations, some more private than others. Many of these are meant to encourage or organize a specific activity,14 some concern governments,15 Cooperative Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 3012(3); S e c u r i t i e s I n v e s t o r Pro t e c t i o n Corporation, 15 U.S.C. § 78ccc(b)(7); Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, 42 U.S.C. § 8104(a). Mixed Civil Service: Government National Mortgage Association and Federal National Mortgage Association, 12 U.S.C. §§ 1723a(d)(1), (d)(2); Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, 29 U.S.C. § 1302(b)(6). Within Civil Service: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, 7 U.S.C. § 1 5 0 7 ( a ) ; National Credit Union A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Central Liquidity Facility, 12 U.S.C. § 1795f(a)(2); Small Business Administration, 15 U.S.C. § 634(a); Commodity Credit Corporation, 15 U.S.C. § 714h. 14 Corporation of Foreign Security Holders, 15 U.S.C. § 77dd; China Trade Act corporations, 15 U.S.C. §§ 146(c), 17 and others deal with services that could be provided by private companies*16 156; Textile Foundation, 15 U.S.C. § 504(b); National Park Foundation, 16 U.S.C. § 19i; National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States, 16 U.S.C. § 468(c)(b); Roosevelt Campobello International Park Commission, 16 U.S.C. § 1103(c); National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 16 U.S.C. § 3703(c)(5); Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, 20 U.S.C. § 4414(3); National Trust for Drug Free Youth, 20 U.S.C. § 4665(d)(3); Inter-American Foundation, 22 U.S.C. § 2 9 0 f (e ) (10) ; African Development Foundation, 22 U.S.C. § 290h-4(a)(2); United States Institute of Peace, 22 U.S.C. § 4604 (j) ; Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, 33 U.S.C. § 9 8 4 ( a ) (3); P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue Development Corporation, 40 U.S.C. § 875(4). 15 Taiwan, 22 U.S.C. § 3303(b)(7); Puerto Rico, 48 U.S.C. § 733. 16 Tennessee Valley Authority, 16 U.S.C. § 831c(b); United States Postal Service, 39 U.S.C. § 401(1). There is a final group of statutes that are not readily classifiable. Gallaudet University, 20 U.S.C. § 4302(a); Indian cooperative associations in Oklahoma, 25 U.S.C. § 505; settlement agreement between Maine and Passamaguoddy Tribe, Penobscott Nation, and Houlton 18 Although each of these organizations pursue a governmental objective, none of them compare with other federal agencies. These organizations are not rule-making in nature, and where the organization has its own employees, they are most likely not within the Civil Service System.* 17 Band of Maliseet Indians, 25 U.S.C. § 1725(d)(1); Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2679; labor unions, 29 U.S.C. § 185(b); unions of the USPS, 39 U.S.C. § 1208(e). 17 N o t in C i v i l S e r v i c e : Corporation of Foreign Security Holders, 15 U.S.C. § 7 7 dd; Roosevelt Campobello International Park Commission, 16 U.S.C. § 1103(d); National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 16 U.S.C. § 3702(g)(2)(a); Gallaudet University, 20 U.S.C. § 4303(b)(4); Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, 20 U.S.C. § 4416(a); National Trust for Drug Free Youth, 2 0 U.S.C. § 4465(d)(7); Inter-American Foundation, 22 U.S.C. § 290f(e)(5); African Development Foundation, 22 U.S.C. 19 Congress has used the "sue and be sued" clause over many years, in circumstances where the organization has been meant to act and be treated like other private organizations. By charging the Postal Service with the power to "sue and be sued," Congress included the Postal Service in the family of private like organizations, and intended it to be subject to the same liability as private employers. Recognizing this, the courts have construed "sue and be sued" waivers of § 290h-4(a)(7). Mixed Civil Service: Tennessee Valley Authority, 16 U.S.C. § 831b; United States Postal Service (a full discussion follows in Part II) . Within Civil Service: United States Institute of Peace, 22 U.S.C. § 4606(b); Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, 33 U.S.C. § 984(a)(7). 20 sovereign immunity broadly. In Federal Housing Administration v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242 (1940), the Supreme Court stated: [W]e start from the premise that such waivers by Congress of governmental immunity in case of such federal instrumentalities should be liberally construed. This policy is in line with the current disfavor of the doctrine of governmental immunity from suit, as evidenced by the increasing tendency of Congress to waive the immunity w h e r e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t a l corporations are concerned.... Hence, when Congress established such an agency, authorizes it to engage in commercial and business transactions with the public, and permits it to "sue and be sued," it cannot be lightly assumed that restrictions on that authority are to be implied. Rather if the general authority to "sue and be sued" is to be delimited by implied exceptions, it must be clearly shown that certain types of suits are not consistent with the statutory or constitutional scheme, that an implied restriction of the general authority is necessary to avoid grave interference with the performance of a governmental function, or that for other reasons it was plainly the purpose of Congress to use the "sue and be sued" clause in a narrow sense. In 21 the absence of such showing, it must be presumed that when Congress launched a governmental agency into the commercial world and endowed it with authority to "sue and be sued," that agency is not less amenable to judicial process than a private enterprise under like circumstances would be. 309 U.S. at 245. Moreover, the waiver of Postal Service immunity is even broader than that found in Burr. In passing the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, 84 Stat 719, Congress not only indicated that the Postal Service could "sue and be sued," 39 USC § 401(1), but also that it had the power "to settle and compromise claims by or against it," § 401(8), and that " [t]he provisions of chapter 171 and all other provisions of title 28 relating to tort claims shall apply to tort claims arising out of activities of the Postal Service." § 409(c). Neither of these provisions would have been necessary had Congress intended to preserve sovereign immunity with respect to the Postal Service. Franchise Tax Board v. United States Postal Service. 467 U.S. 512, 519 (1984). The broad waiver effected by a "sue 22 and be sued" clause was held as long ago as 1913 to permit an award of pre judgment interest against a federally- chartered corporation carrying out government related functions. National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers_v^ Parrish, 229 U.S. 494 (1913). Thus, lower courts have upheld awards of pre judgment interest against a number of federally created organizations with the power to sue and be sued. The Postal Service and the Tennessee Valley Authority are the two agencies against whom Title VII plaintiffs have been awarded pre-judgment interest. See Nagy v. United States Postal Service, 773 F.2d 1190 (11th Cir. 1985) and Milner v. Bolder, 54 6 F.Supp 37 5 (E.D.Cal. 1982) Eastland v. Tennessee Valley Authority./ 35 E.P.D. 11 34,713, and generally, Queen 23 v. Tennessee Valley Authority. 689 F. 2d 80 (6th Cir. 1982).18 In non-Title VII actions, pre-judgment interest has been awarded against the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation,19 the Commodity Credit Corporation,20 the Federal Savings 18 By a sharply divided court, the 8th Circuit has reached the opposite conclusion. Cross v. United States Postal Service. 733 F.2d 1327 (8th Cir. 1984) (aff'd en banc by an equally divided court); Loeffler v. Tisch. 806 F . 2d 817 (8th Cir. 1986) (en banc, decided 6-5). 19 FCIC v. DeCell. 76 So.2d 826 (S.Ct. Miss. 1955) (pre-judgment interest allowed on insurance claim when the FCIC refused to cover 1947 crop damage); but. R & R Farm Enterprises v. FCIC. 788 F.2d 1148 (5th Cir. 1986) (pre- and post judgment interest immunity not waived since FCIC is a non commercial venture where FCIC refused to pay entire claim for allegedly lost crops). 20 Asheville Mica Co. v. CCC. 239 F.Supp. 383 (S.D.N.Y. 1965) aff'd 360 F .2d 931 (2d Cir. 1966) (pre-judgment interest granted where CCC breached contract concerning imported mica and stockpiling). 24 and Loan Insurance Corporation,21 the Department of Housing and Urban D e v e l o p m e n t ,22 the Secretary of E d u c a t i o n ,23 and the Veter a n s 21 worth N-V. Savings Bank v_̂ _FSLIC, 515 F2d 1355 (D.C. Cir. 1975) (pre judgment interest granted on bank reserved held by FSLIC). 22Ferguson v. Union National Bank of Clarksburg. W.Va.. 125 F.2d 753 (4th Cir. 1942) (interest allowed where Federal Housing Administrator, now Secretary of HUD, guaranteed loan to an industrial corporation) ; Industrial Indemnity ,— IrtciiJL v. Landrieu, 615 F .2d 644 (5th Cir. 1980) ("sue and be sued" is a waiver of sovereign immunity for purposes of a c o n t r a c t o r seeking payment for construction work on housing project insured by the Secretary under a program authorized by the National Housing Act), United States v. Parkside Court,— Inc. , 257 F.Supp. 177, 179 (D.N.J. 1966) afflA 376 F . 2d 853 (3d Cir. 1967) ("Congress, having launched its agency into the world of commerce, endowed it with both the right to sue and be sued as any other private enterprise"). 23Citizens Savings Bank v. Bell, 605 F.Supp. 1033 (D.R.I. 1985) (lender is owed pre-judgment interest on guaranteed student loan). 25 Administration administrator.24 25 The "sue and be sued" clause has also allowed interest against bank receivers,^ labor unions,26 and ERISA benefit plans,27 all 24 New York Guardian Mortgage Coro, v. Cleland, 473 F.Supp. 422 (S.D.N.Y. 1979) (sovereign immunity not a bar to pre-judgment interest in regards to home loan guarantees); see also In re Townsend. 348 F.Supp. 1284 (W.D.Mo. 1972) ("sue and be sued" waives immunity so that a bankruptcy injunction prevents the VA from foreclosing on a lien.). 25McCartv v, Gault. 24 F.Supp. 977 (D.Or. 1938) (stockholder awarded pre- and post-judgment interest on his assessment from bank receiver). 26Airco Speer Carbon-Graphite v. Local 502, Int'l Union of Elec., Radio and Machine Workers of America, AFL-CIO. 479 F.Supp. 246 (W.D.Penn. 1979) (pre judgment interest allowed where union breached no-strike clause of collective bargaining agreement entitling employer to damages) ; Eazor Exp. Inc. v. International Bro. of Teamsters. 520 F.2d 951 (3d Cir. 1975) cert, denied 424 U.S. 935 (1976) rehearing denied 425 U.S. 908 (1976) (in action for unauthorized strike, pre-judgment interest available when the damages are ascertainable with precision). 26 in cases where rights have been statutorily created.28 On the basis of Congress's inclusion of the Postal Service within the category of "sue and be sued" agencies, and the case law that developed both before and after the adoption of the Postal Reorganization Act, the Postal Service should be subject to pre-judgment interest. 27 27Short v. Central States. Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund. 729 F.2d 567 (8th Cir. 1984) (in order to make plaintiff whole, tractor owner-operator is entitled to pre-judgment interest from the time of the denial of his application); Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp. , 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir. 1981) cert, denied 454 U.S. 968 (1981) (pre-judgment interest is appropriate equitable relief to executives dismissed without cause). 2 8 See 12 U.S.C.A. 197(b), 29 U.S.C.A. 185(b), 29 U.S.C.A. 1132(d)(1). 27 CONGRESS INTENDED POSTAL SERVICE EMPLOYEES TO BE TREATED LIKE EMPLOYEES IN PRIVATE FIRMS Unlike most other federal employees, the workers at the Postal Service are not within the usual civil service program; 29 rather, they are within the postal career service created by chapters 10 and 12 of Title 39 of the U.S. Code. These chapters place the postal employees within only a few procedures of the Civil Service, viz., adverse actions, preference eligibility, pay allowances based on living costs, compensation for w o r k injuries, and retirement. II. 29 "Except as otherwise provided by law, an employee of the United States Postal Service or of the Postal Rate Commission is deemed not an employee for purposes of this title." 5 U.S.C.A. § 2105(e). 28 Everything else is subject to collective bargaining.30 In terms of compensation, Congress clearly intended that Postal Service employees have salaries competitive with the private sector. Among the policies of the reorganized postal system is that "As an employer, the Postal Service shall achieve and maintain compensation for its officers and employees comparable to the rates and types of compensation paid in the private sector of the economy of the United States." 39 U.S.C. § 101 (1980). Pay encompasses more than an employee's salary; it also includes intangible benefits. This was recognized by Congress explicitly when it stated that "It shall be the policy of the Postal Service to maintain compensation and 30 See 39 U.S.C.A. § 1005 (1980). 29 benefits for all officers and employees on a standard of comparability to the compensation and benefits paid for comparable levels of work in the private sector of the economy." 39 U.S.C. § 1003 (1980) (emphasis added). In addition to the benefits provided Postal employees, labor-management relations are also patterned on the private sector. The Postal Service is the only federal organization which falls under the auspices of the National Labor Relations Board, 39 U.S.C. § 1209(a), and for the purposes of labor-management reporting and disclosure procedures the Postal Service is specifically considered a private employer. 39 U.S.C. § 1209(b), 29 U.S.C. 402(e). Congress intended to "bring postal labor relations within the same structure that exists for nationwide 30 enterprises in the private sector." House Report, at 3662, quoted in Mudav v. C l e a v e r . 590 F.Supp. 1209, 1210 (W.D.Mich. 1984). One important component of an employee's working conditions is protection from discrimination. For individuals who feel that they may be subject to discrimination on account of race, sex, religion, or national origin, it would be natural for them to prefer companies with non-discriminatory policies and grievance procedures over other companies. While both private employers and the Postal Service are subject to Title VII,31 the remedies available to aggrieved employees differ if Postal workers cannot obtain pre 31 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e-2, 2000e- 16(a). 31 judgment interest on back pay awards.32 Thus disallowing pre-judgment interest to postal Service employees would result in a lower compensation package than is provided by the private sector of the economy. III. THE INCLUSION OF THE POSTAL SERVICE IN SECTION 717 DID NOT DIMINISH THE RIGHTS OF POSTAL EMPLOYEES The main basis for the government's argument that Postal Service employees should be treated like other federal employees is that the Postal Service is included in Section 717 of Title VII along with other federal employees, 32 pre-judgment interest awards are available against private employers. Taylor v. Phillips Industries. Inc,. 593 F.2d 783 (7th Cir. 1979); Davis v. Jobs For Progress. Inc.. 427 F.Supp. 479 (D.Ariz. 1976); Green v. United States Steel Corp., 640 F.Supp. 1521 (E.D.Pa. 1986) . 32 rather than Section 701, which includes private employees. Contrary to the government's suggestion, this was not done to indicate that Postal Service employees are like other federal employees, rather, it simply reflects that the Postal Service was not previously under Title VII, and that the Title VII provisions were simultaneously made available to Postal employees and other federal employees. A review of the legislative history of the Postal Reorganization Act clarifies that Postal workers are to have anti-discriminatory procedures at least as good as those provided the public sector. On June 30, 1970, Senator Cook introduced an amendment to the Postal Reorganization Act which would subject the Postal Service to the provisions of 33 Title VII. The amendment was quickly adopted by a 93-0 vote, 116 Cong. Rec. 22279-80 (1970), but the conference committee deleted the amendment. The floor manager, Senator McGee, explained to the Senate that the deletion was less a concession to the House and its insistence than it was to the persuasion of the conferees in consultation with the legal minds involved in the interpretation of the law and in consultation with the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission that, indeed, in this instance a very strong case was made that the equal rights provision would redound in more equal terms and more forceful terms under the Executive order that is now on the books than going through the EEOC. It was on that ground that the Senate conferees decided that because of the absence of similar language on the House side, we were really making a stronger case procedurally, because we were achieving the goals that the 93-to-0 vote spelled out on the Senate side. 116 Cong. Rec. 26956 (1970) . In other words, the conferees adopted the Civil 34 Service Commission procedures since they believed those procedures were superior to those of the EEOC.33 Indeed, Senator McGee stated that if this proves not to be the case, the Senate would take appropriate action.34 33 Representative Daniels explained: "Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to the distinguished chairman of our committee and to the gentleman from California that as a conferee I requested the Senate to reconsider its position [°n Title VII]. The Senate reconsidered and receded and agreed to accept the House version which permits any charge or complaint of discrimination by virtue of age, sex, national origin and so forth to still be heard by the Civil Service Commission where as I pointed out the procedures with reference to the hearing of such complaints is much more adequate and affords much more protection to the person who is complaining." 116 Cong. Rec. 27597 (1970). 34"Mr. McGEE.... The conferees believe we will, indeed, achieve the laudable purpose that the Cook amendment intended. If it does not, if we discover that the conferees were proven to be wrong in their expectation and that the fears of the Senator from Kentucky [Cook] are warranted by subsequent decision or 35 Since the intent was to give Postal Service employees procedural protections as great or greater than those enjoyed by private employees, no intent to afford them inferior relief can be inferred from Congress' decisions in 1970 and 1972 to leave administrative enforcement in the hands of the Civil Service Commission.35 it follows that sovereign immunity was waived as to pre-judgment interest. action, then I can guarantee to him that this body would proceed at once with the urging of members of the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service to legislate appropriately without delay. We believe it is not necessary. That is our judgment." 116 Cong. Rec. 26957 (1970). 35 The fact that Congress later, in 1978, concluded that its confidence in the Civil Service Commission was misplaced and it acquiesced in the transfer of federal EEO authority to the Egual Employment Opportunity Commission can not be retroactively used to re interpret its intent when it passed the Postal Reorganization Act in 1970. Cf. Brown V . GSA. 425 U.S. 820 (1976). 3 6 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the court below should be reversed. Respectfully submitted, JULIUS LeVONNE CHAMBERS GAIL J. WRIGHT* CHARLES STEPHEN RALSTON 16th Floor 99 Hudson Street New York, N.Y. 10013 (212) 219-1900 Attorneys for Amicus Curiae NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. * Counsel of Record Hamilton Graphics, Inc.— 200 Hudson Street, New York, N.Y.— {212) 966-4177