OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
LA 200, John Adams Building, 110 Second Street, S.E.
Washington, DC 20540-1999
v. Case No. 03-SN-29(CV,RP)
March 10, 2004
OFFICE OF THE U.S. SENATE
SERGEANT AT ARMS,
v. Case No. 03-SN-45(CV,RP)
ASSOCIATION AND EXECUTIVE
BOARD OF THE COMMITTEE OF
CORRESPONDENTS RADIO AND
TELEVISION PRESS GALLERY OF
THE UNITED STATES SENATE.
Before the Board of Directors: Susan
S. Robfogel, Chair; Barbara L. Camens, Alan V. Friedman; Roberta
L. Holzwarth; Barbara Childs Wallace, Members.
ORDER DENYING COMPLAINANT’S
INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL IN CASE NO. 03-SN-29 (CV, RP) , AND ESTABLISHING
A BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN COMPLAINANT’S PETITION FOR REVIEW IN
CASE NO. 03-SN-45 (RP, CV)
In Case No. 03-SN-29 (CV, RP) the Hearing Officer
issued a Pre-Hearing Order that denied Complainant’s motion
for “conditional class certification”. A hearing is
scheduled to open in that matter on March 15, 2004. The Complainant,
in essence, seeks interlocutory review by the Board directing the
Hearing Officer to provide a forum to “the group of aggrieved
covered employees”. However, the Complainant failed to comply
with Section 7.13 of the Office’s Procedural Rules, which
requires that a party file a request for interlocutory review with
the hearing officer within 5 days after service of the adverse ruling
on the parties. Section 7.13 (d) contemplates that the Hearing Officer
will apply prescribed criteria to such requests and either endorse
or not a request to the Board. The Complainant bypassed that essential
process and has presented no extra-ordinary circumstances warranting
that the Board directly consider her request in these circumstances.
Accordingly, the Board denies Complainant’s request for interlocutory
review of the Hearing Officer’s “conditional class certification”
ruling without prejudice to the Complainant raising the matter following
the issuance of the Hearing Officer’s final decision and order
in Case No. 03-SN-29 (CV, RP) pursuant to Section 7.16 of the Office’s
The Hearing Officer, in Case No. 03-SN-45 (CV,
RP), issued a final order that dismissed that entire complaint on
jurisdictional grounds, finding that the named Respondent was not
an employing office within the meaning of the Congressional
Accountability Act. We shall treat the Complainant’s March
2, 2004 filing, challenging that determination, as a petition for
review of the final Order in Case No. 03-SN-45 (CV, RP) under Section
8.01 of the Board’s Procedural Rules. Accordingly, the parties
are advised that the briefing schedule described in Section 8.01(b)(1)&(2)
shall run from the Complainant’s receipt of this Order.
It is so ordered.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned employee of the Office of
Compliance, certify that on the date indicated below I served the
foregoing Order by facsimile mail upon the below named persons,
addressed as indicated.
Sam E. Taylor
P.O. Box 15370
Washington, DC 20003
Claudia A. Kostel, Esq.
Senate Senior Counsel for Employment
Office of the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment
Senate Hart Office Building, Room 103
Washington, D.C. 20510
Counsel for U.S. Senate Sergeant At Arms
Lawrence Lorber, Esq.
Stephanie L. Marn
Proskauer, Rose LLP
1233 20th Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
Counsel for Association and Executive Board of
of Correspondents, Radio and Television Press Gallery of the United
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 10th day of
Kisha L. Harley