for all intents and purposes, the DCOHR receives charges filed with the EEOC. Even if this arrangement alone fails to refute PwC’s argument, it bears mentioning that the DCOHR has waived its right to process age discrimination claims initially filed with the EEOC. The worksharing agreement provides that “[t]he EEOC and the [DCOHR] will process all Title VII, ADA, and ADEA charges that they originally receive.” Id. ¶ III A. Deferral state filing requirements are designed to “give state agencies a prior opportunity to consider discrimination complaints,” Love v. Pullman Co., 404 U.S. 522, 526, 92 S.Ct. 616, 30 L.Ed.2d 679 (1972), and states may voluntarily waive that right if they wish, see EEOC v. Commercial Office Prods. Co., 486 U.S. 107, 117, 108 S.Ct. 1666, 100 L.Ed.2d 96 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Here, the District of Columbia has
holding that actions to consider or enforce voluntary conciliation agreements between the eeoc and the defendants under title vii are properly within the jurisdiction of the federal courts holding that states may waive the title vii 60day deferral period but retain jurisdiction over discrimination charges by entering into worksharing agreements with the eeoc holding that in light of a worksharing agreement between the state agency and the eeoc a charge of discrimination filed with the state agency was properly filed with the eeoc on the same date holding that the limitations period for a title vii claim for pay discrimination begins with the first discrete act holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii