Suit Filed Charging Civil Service Test Discriminatory

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at .

Luevano v. Campbell

Collection
- Press Releases
Creator
- LDF
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 5559c69a-bb92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b

Cite this item

Press Releases, Volume 7. Suit Filed Charging Civil Service Test Discriminatory, 1979. 5559c69a-bb92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/939e30f2-427f-458d-8698-e17edf3a129f/suit-filed-charging-civil-service-test-discriminatory. Accessed November 23, 2025.

Copied!

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC

egal efense lund 10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 « (212) 586-8397

SUIT FILED CHARGING CIVIL SERVICE TEST DISCRIMINATORY

For immediate release For further information:

Monday, January 29, 1979 N.Y. - Steve Ralston

212-586-8397

San Fran. - Fernando Garcia

415-863-8232

Washington, D.C. — LDF

202-638-3278

Washington, D.C. - January 29 -- A legal challenge

that goes to the heart of racial discrimination in

the federal civil service system was filed today in

the United States District Court in the District of

Columbia. If successful, the suit (Luevano v.- Campbell

would eliminate the present Professional and Administrative

Career Examination (PACE) which, in most cases, is

the single determining factor in considering applicants

for hundreds of thousands of professional, administrative

and technical jobs in a large number of federal agencies.

The suit, jointly filed by the NAACP Legal Defense

Fund (LDF), the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights

Under Law and I.M.A.G.E. De California (IMAGE), an

association of Hispanic-American federal and state

employees, charges that the adverse impact of the PACE

—-more-

Contributions are deductible for U.S. income tax purposes

‘The NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATIONAL FUND is not part of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People although it

was founded by it and shares its commitment to equal rights. LDF has had for over 20 years a separate Board, program, staff, office and budget.

Civil Service Test - 2

on blacks, Hispanics and other racial minorities is

so severe that it threatens to segregate the middle and

upper levels of the executive branch of the Federal

government. The suit further charges that the test

is not in compliance with the guidelines established

by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),

the Federal Executive Agency Guidelines on Employee

Selection Procedures, or certain provisions of Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Angel Luevano, Melody Van and Vicky Chapman are

represented in the case as individuals and as members

of a class which includes past, present and future

black and Hispanic applicants for civil service positions

which are awarded on the basis of the PACE scores.

IMAGE is also a plaintiff in the suit, representing

the interests of its members and other Hispanic persons

who are discriminated against by the use of the PACE.

The defendant is Alan Campbell, Director of the U.S.

Office of Personnel Management, formerly the Civil

Service Commission.

The PACE is a written test that is supposed to

test cognitive ability. It has been developed and

is used by the federal civil service to select persons

for entry-level positions in nonclerical, administrative

and technical jobs. Those chosen by the PACE are often

-more-

Civil Service Test - 3

placed in "career ladder" positions and subsequently

promoted to higher, non-supervisory levels without

competition. Thus, failure on the PACE substantially

reduces opportunities for these jobs as well.

Competition for the jobs filled from the PACE

compete each year for one of the 8,000 jobs that become

available. Most applicants must score at least 90%

to be considered for a job even though the passing

score is 70%. Generally, final employment decisions

are based strictly on the PACE score with no consideration

given other abilities which may be relevant to the

job.

The adverse impact of the PACE on racial minorities

is clear. For example, in the 1977 PACE in the San

Francisco region, 25.2% of the white applicants scored

90% or above, while only 1.1% of the black, and no Hispanic,

applicants did. Despite these indications, the PACE

has not been properly validated as required by federal

employment testing guidelines. The suit contends that

continued use of the test, without validation, is a

violation of the plaintiffs' rights to equal employment

opportunity.

-more-

Civil Service Test - 4

The plaintiffs are seeking a court declaration

that their rights have been violated, an injunction

against the continued use of the PACE and back pay

for the losses they have suffered due to the racially

discriminatory examination.

=30>

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Suit Filed Charging Civil Service Test Discriminatory

Collection

Creator

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in