A $1.6 million reason to avoid sex discrimination in hiring
A surefire way for an employer to upset the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is to keep recruiting and hiring notes such as:
- “DO NOT schedule a female for this post”
- “Post is MALE ONLY!”
It’s because of discriminatory “reminders” like these, as well as other infractions, that an Alabama contract security solutions provider must pay $1.6 million, according to an EEOC lawsuit.
The suit alleged the company engaged in sex discrimination over the past few years by:
- Denying security officer jobs and assignments to women.
- Telling female applicants that they wouldn’t be selected for security positions or assignments because of their sex.
The EEOC’s complaint also alleged that company displayed a pattern of sex discrimination, keeping women from pursuing job opportunities despite having prior work experience in security, law enforcement, or the military.
Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a federal employment antidiscrimination law enforced by the EEOC.
Lessons for other employers
Since most companies don’t have $1.6 million laying around, here are three ways to stay off the EEOC’s radar when recruiting and hiring:
- Do an audit. Look for and remove any discriminatory language in the recruiting and hiring processes. This could be documents stored electronically, notes jotted down on paper, emails back and forth with hiring managers, etc. Dig through and clean it up. Especially watch out for notes taken during interviews, such as:
- “This candidate looks too old for the job.”
- “I don’t think she could lift the materials. A man would be stronger.”
- Review client relationships. Avoid catering to client preferences based on sex or any other protected class. Meaning, if a client says, for example, they’d rather have a female customer service representative versus a male, that is the kind of “red flag” language that could lead to a lawsuit if not addressed and dealt with appropriately.
- Be proactive. Whether it’s a million-dollar lawsuit or not, the damage from defending against discrimination claims costs goes beyond money. In the case of this Alabama company, for instance, they have years of EEOC monitoring, training, and other requirements ahead. There are also unseen costs in cases like this, such as a tarnished public image and lower employee morale. It’s better to be proactive and have a compliant recruiting and hiring process than risk a claim.
Key to remember: Having a compliant recruiting and hiring process is priceless.