Respondent objects to the consideration of any allegations regarding settlement negotiations and also denies that any settlement was reached. The existence or substance of any settlement negotiations is not germane to the issues presented by the pending motion. The Commission lacks jurisdiction over Complainant's allegations that Respondent did not extend to her the same opportunity it gave a white employee to enroll her child in its child care program and that Respondent did not select her for vacant positions because of her race because she did not file her charge within 180 days of the occurrence of those events. Further, the record shows that there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether Respondent terminated Complainant's employment because of her race. Respondent's motion should be granted, and a summary decision in its favor should issue.
Complainant is black.
At all relevant times, Respondent maintained a day care program for the children of its students, faculty, and staff. During Complainant's first academic year of employment, 1988-1989, she was permitted to enroll her child in this program free of charge. None of Respondent's employees were allowed to enroll their children in Respondent's day care program free of charge after the 1988-89 academic year. Complainant applied for a part-time child care worker position in the fall of 1989. Respondent has provided sworn evidence that Complainant applied for no other positions, either orally or in writing.