In 1984, Norman Drake had a good job as a satellite operator at Lockheed Missiles and Space Division in Sunnyvale. His story could have been an example of the progress of African Americans and other minorities under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Instead, what happened to him reads like a page out of the Deep South in the '20's. It is the story, however, of what can happen in any company, in any region of the country, in any year. It is the story of what can happen when management does not set clear standards for respect for civil rights and when the agencies charged with enforcing the civil rights laws shirk their responsibilities.
Norman Drake started working for Lockheed in 1970. In 1984, Drake, like all the other Level 2 satellite operators at Lockheed, he expected a promised raise and a promotion to Level 3 under a department-wide reorganization. He was singled out, however, and was the only operator among 75 not to receive the raise and promotion; he was also the only minority at that level in the group. Instead, Drake was told he would have to take written tests and also be tested for proficiency. He passed the written tests, but his supervisor never followed up to evaluate Drake's competence. Instead, he was demoted to a Level 1.
Drake complained about the demotion. He had never really complained before; he's just not that sort of guy. Not that there hadn't been reason -- but he was able to tolerate the "jokes" over the public address system -- even the jokes about his kids. "How does Drake keep his kids from bouncing on the bed? He puts velcro on the ceiling and it catches them by their nappy little heads."
This time, though, Drake complained. He made a complaint internally, and when that produced a shrug of a reaction, Drake filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). Then, according to his attorney, Bill Woodson of Palo Alto, California, "Drake's troubles really began." Drake's security clearance was pulled, so that he could no longer be a satellite operator, and he was "busted" to the level of a security guard. After receiving Department of Defense clearances for fifteen years with no difficulty, suddenly the DOD auditors uncovered some disturbing information. Drake's supervisor, Charlie Musser, had let the investigators know that although Drake wouldn't "deliberately" divulge classified information, he might do it inadvertently. And Drake did have financial problems, Musser told them. And, yes, unfortunatley, there was a bit of an honesty problem.
Later, at the trial, Musser at first denied saying any of that to the DOD. He denied it until Drake's attorneys produced the statement that Musser had signed, which recorded the damning remarks. Lockheed's attorneys didn't know it, but Norman Drake himself, before he had hired an attorney, had filed a Freedom of Information Act request to try to find out why he had lost his security clearance.
Losing his job as a Satellite Operator hurt financially. Other forms of retaliation were physically damaging: nails were placed under his car tires; trash cans full of debris were placed over doors before he opened them; and he was physically assaulted by co-workers. And then there was the abuse that was just unspeakably cruel -- and frightening: One man told Drake, in the presence of other Lockheed employees, "you ought to hang yourself." On three Sundays, after his Saturday graveyard shift, Drake went to his locker to change into his suit for church, and found it had been slashed.
Few of Drake's co-workers either cared or felt safe to complain about the treatment of Norman Drake. One who did speak up, John Atnip, found his sworn, 33-page statement to the E.E.O.C., which he had given with the promise of confidentiality, had somehow made its way into the desk drawer of Drake's supervisor, Charlie Musser. In his statement, Atnip described how, after Drake had complained internally about racial slurs, Lockheed managers would enter the satellite operators' area, announce that such actions violated company policy, and then burst into loud laughter. (Atnip eventually got forced out, and Lockheed settled his lawsuit against the company.)
Norman Drake sued Lockheed for race discrimination, racial harassment, and for retaliation for having made complaints. During the trial, no one from Lockheed ever denied the incidents of abuse. The supervisor, Musser, not only allowed the treatment of Drake to go on, but was also proved to have signed time cards that he knew to be fraudulent. Witnesses testified about examples: workers signed in, then left to spend their shifts at nude-dancing bars, and returned to clock out, all with Musser's knowledge and permission. The judge did not allow Attorney Woodson to present evidence of sexual harassment complaints against Musser, but another court may deal with that: Lockheed transferred Musser (for the time card fraud, not the race or sex harassment); subordinates at his new location have already filed complaints against him.
At the trial, Woodson's partner, attorney Tom Kotoske, questioned Lockheed executives about their response to Drake's internal and E.E.O.C. complaints. Vice President John Canelli testified that Drake came to him under Lockheed's "Open Door" policy (under which an employee is supposedly free to go over the head of his supervisor to report any violation of company policy without fear of retaliation.) Canelli said he believed that if Drake's complaints were true, they would constitute racial harassment, and he ordered an investigation. Two weeks later, Canelli said, he learned that what Drake reported "had actually transpired", but decided not to take any action because the specific incidents had occurred "4 to 5 months earlier". When Kotoske queried the Lockheed executive about what difference the 4 to 5 months made, Canelli responded that from Drake's description, he had thought the remarks were more recent. Since it happened 4 to 5 months earlier, Canelli explained, "there was nothing further for me to do." Another executive, John Turco, admitted that Lockheed management had been aware of the destruction of Norman Drake's suits as well as other incidents, but that since they had been unable to identify the individuals responsible, there was nothing more to be done about it.
The jury awarded Norman Drake $925,000, of which $500,000 was for punitive damages. After the trial, the jurors gathered and told Woodson and Kotoske that they had wanted to award Drake $2 million, but one retired man, an ex-IBMer, on the jury was adamantly opposed to any punitive damages at all, and so they had compromised.
Woodson told DataLine that he is currently pursuing a number of other cases of race and sex discrimination, as well as sexual harassment, against Lockheed and other large defense contractors. He acknowledged feeling overwhelmed on occasion by the stories of Norman Drake and others. Woodson has tried to understand how such abuses can go on, particularly in federal contractors, which are supposedly under greater scrutiny than other companies, and which undergo regular review by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. "There are three factors that seem to coalesce" to allow these civil rights violations in companies such as Lockheed, Woodson said. "They have a tradition of secrecy; they have a dominant 'good old boy' system, with a revolving door to the military; and they feel invincible, because they are large, government contractors", he explained. (In the early stages of the case of Drake v. Lockheed, Woodson was warned not to go up against "Lockheed's three huge law firms with their hundreds of attorneys".) So far, Lockheed has not indicated that they will appeal the decision in Drake v. Lockheed. Also, a new Chief Executive Officer has instituted "a new era" at Lockheed, according to Terri Sligh, recently-appointed Manager of Diversity Programs at the company.
Editor's Note (1991)
Several friends of DataLine questioned our decision to write about Norman Drake, not because it is not a worthy or important story, but because it seemed to them to be outside our focus of the glass ceiling. There are two strong reasons that convinced us to include this story. One is that the glass ceiling in many companies, and Lockheed may be one of them, is found somewhere around the level of the boundary between exempt and non-exempt workers. The other is that his story demonstrates clearly that the decisions and practices that implement the glass ceiling are bad business decisions and practices, and that the glass ceiling is in fact a result of these very active elements; it is not passive, or part of the architecture. Woodson put it succinctly, "There is a connection between racism, sexism, and inefficiency. It's the same guys doing it."Editor's Note (1994)
Lockheed did appeal the verdict, and lost the appeal. Since then, over 40 more lawsuits for sex and/or race discrimination have been filed against Lockheed. Bill Woodson recently estimated that Lockheed's total costs fighting these claims may have exceeded $40 million dollars.For comments by the CEO of Lockheed, see "An update - Drake V. Lockheed".
Copyright (c) 1991, 1994, DataLine. All rights reserved.
This article may be redistributed provided that the article and this notice remain intact. Under no circumstances may this article be resold or redistributed for compensation of any kind without prior written permission.
Contact DataLine at 848 California Street, San Francisco, CA 94108; e-mail: ronce@well.com, fax: (415) 397 8984, voice: (415) 882 7320