Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So are any of you EEOC counselors? I know I sat through that frickin' week long training in Nashville for something. I'm sure the general consensus is not to do it. You guys are mean. And discrimination is illegal. And asking questions that don't pertain to the job is setting yourself up for a lawsuit. So whatever. Not illegal. Just making you liable. Say it any way you want.
So are any of you EEOC counselors? I know I sat through that frickin' week long training in Nashville for something. I'm sure the general consensus is not to do it. You guys are mean. And discrimination is illegal. And asking questions that don't pertain to the job is setting yourself up for a lawsuit. So whatever. Not illegal. Just making you liable. Say it any way you want.
I use to work for the EEOC as an investigator, and I am the EEO officer (one of my hats, not my primary position) for my company at the establishment I work at.
I know I sat through that frickin' week long training in Nashville for something.
A week is not that long. I have spent that long on FMLA, another week or so on workers comp/disability, don't remember how long on FLSA, more time on EEOC, ENDA, workplace harrassment...
Quote:
I'm sure the general consensus is not to do it.
You are absolutely correct here. That is the general concensus because asking these questions is a really bad idea. Dating bipolar women is a bad idea too, and the general concensus of mothers is that we shouldn't do it. Yet I have done so and it wasn't illegal (it also wasn't a smart move...)
Quote:
You guys are mean. And discrimination is illegal. And asking questions that don't pertain to the job is setting yourself up for a lawsuit. So whatever. Not illegal. Just making you liable. Say it any way you want.
Yes, discrimination is illegal. But you can't just 'say it any way' because one way is correct, and your way is wrong and misleading. The OP may have a case, but it would be based upon actual discrimination, not the interview questions.
The only way you'd have some sort of case is if he said something like "you are such a great candidate but since you are pregnant/getting married I'm not going to hire you."
And even then you'd have to prove he said that and nobody would put that in writing!
I've been asked ALL those questions before and to me it just indicates "job I won't be happy at."
I took one job like that, it wasn't too great and about 1.5 years later I was laid off cuz the lab lost it's funding.
If you make a formal complaint saying that you were not hired because of a certain question was asked, you then have to prove you are a more qualified person than the one that did get hired and your answer was what kept you from being hired.
Do you have more experience, and superior training or degree than the person hired. This you would have to prove to others, that this was the case or you have no case.
Remember there things that have to be kept records of, for the company to prove that they are not discriminating against a protected class of worker. They may have to prove, they are not discriminating against race or ethnic origin. They may have to prove, they are not discriminating against single or married people due to their marital status. Especially larger companies have to keep statistics of applicants, and hires, to see if they are possibly discriminating. Some of the questions that you are objecting to, may be asked strictly to clarify if they have applicants in those protective class, and if the figure is say 40% of people in area are of that particular class, you have to be able to prove you are hiring an acceptable percentage of applicants in that particular group, if they are qualified applicants. To prevent problems, some companies always ask the questions that allow them to mark on a form the answer. They are not part of the application, but are kept separate for statistical purposes and proof of non discrimination.
Example if there are 40% Hispanic population in the area, and a company does not have one Hispanic person on the payroll, they are going to have to answer why none are hired. You can't just say none applied, but answer only 1% of applications are Hispanic and be able to prove it. You have to have records to prove what is happening.
In our particular area, a pie chart on races, shows a tiny sliver for Hispanic population and All Other the same which includes all people not White or Hispanic, with all other including Hispanic is way below 1%. If I was back in the corporate world and hiring, I would make very sure to ask for race, to prove if I even had even one non white applicant. And if the person was non white, I would very well prove if they were the best applicant, or completely not qualified to protect myself from complaints.
Many companies if they do not get enough applicants of a certain protected class, which is a large percentage of the population in the area, will reopen and re-advertise the position to protect themselves and prove they are attempting to hire from the protected class, but are not getting qualified applicants.
With current state and federal laws about discriminating in hiring, it is very smart to ask certain questions you think are illegal, strictly to protect themselves from discrimination complaints. And you may be not given the job and it be given to a less qualified person of a protected class, to keep their employment numbers within a certain range to protect the company from having to prove non discrimination claims and having to pay big fines. As has been pointed out it is not against the law to ask those questions, but only to use them to discriminate and hire someone that is not protected instead.
Last edited by oldtrader; 04-05-2014 at 02:10 AM..
Old trader is correct, but his example also points out one of the limits of EEOC regulations. Race is easy to track and commit hire rates to application rates to general population. Same thing with gender. Both are requested at time of application (as an aside, as a hiring manager I never, ever, ever see these).
Age is also fairly easy to track and compare.
Marital status is tougher. .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
