County Fights to Hear Discrimination Claims

The Orange County Board of Commissioners will do battle in the state Court of Appeals to defend an ordinance previously ruled unconstitutional, but one that it believes protects residents' civil rights.

The commissioners voted unanimously Nov. 21 to challenge a Nov. 13 Superior Court ruling that the county's civil rights ordinance violates the state Constitution.

If the Superior Court ruling stands, Orange County's Human Rights and Relations Department no longer will be able to investigate residents' employment discrimination claims, said Annette Moore, director of the county Human Rights and Relations Department.

"The significance of the ruling is that Orange County residents won't have a local forum to bring complaints regarding employment discrimination," she said.

The Superior Court ruling originated with a discrimination suit filed by Mary Williams against Blue Cross & Blue Shield of North Carolina.

Moore said Blue Cross & Blue Shield filed a counterclaim stating the ordinance under which Williams brought the suit was unconstitutional.

Michelle Vanstory, spokeswoman for Blue Cross & Blue Shield, said the problem with the ordinance was that it created different rules for different state residents. "We do feel that private employees and employers in Orange County have been subject to different rules than private employees and employers elsewhere in the state," she said. "As a result of the ordinance, we had been facing inconsistent interpretation of civil rights laws."

The ordinance, which became partially effective in January 1995, created a work-sharing agreement between the Human Rights and Relations Department and the district office of the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Charlotte.

Under the work-share agreement, housing or employment discrimination claims from Orange County could be filed with either agency. The work-share agreement benefits residents in a number of ways, Moore said.

"The Human Rights and Relations Department is closer to the community so we can do a more thorough job of investigating the cases. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission gets probably 10,000 complaints yearly across the state," she said. "They have a small budget, so how many people are there to hear these complaints?"

And commissioners say they are not satisfied with the ruling and will continue the fight. "We don't want our citizens to have to wait for state- and federal-level recourse when they feel they've been discriminated against," Commissioner Stephen Halkiotis said.

Vanstory said that while the county will keep arguing against the ruling, the company is secure in its belief that the ordinance breaks a state law.

Commissioner Margaret Brown said Orange County's ordinance was not unique in the state. "There are several other counties that have this ordinance, so there will be more people interested in this case than just the people of Orange County," she said.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is one of the parties that will be watching the Orange County appeal. The Superior Court ruling could impact the commission's work-share arrangements with New Hanover and Durham counties, which have ordinances similar to that of Orange County.

But the ruling's effects are uncertain, said EEOC regional attorney Mindy Weinstein. "The EEOC has seen the decision, and we are in the process of assessing what impact the decision will have on us," she said. "Regardless of this decision, people who feel that they've been discriminated against can still file with the EEOC."

But the issue of federal or local recourse is not the only issue at stake, Halkiotis said.

He said the commissioners' commitment to the civil rights ordinance stems from moral convictions. "This is also about a philosophy - that's what makes Orange County unique," he said. "I think if you look at the efforts of civil rights in this state, you'll find the roots here in Orange. We're committed to that philosophy."

The City Editor can be reached

at citydesk@unc.edu.