How Recruitment and Human Resources Define "Discrimination."

[paft.livejournal.com]

Advice on how to handle applications from deaf jobseekers, from people working in recruitment and human resources. You can’t ‘discriminate’ -- instead:

I just probably would have let her fill it out. You write a note on the back of it that said ‘not a fit.’

Just accept it and don’t call. You can’t tell her that. Handicapped people, they have more rights than anyone in the world. You just have to accept her application and then just don’t call.

You have to be very careful. In today’s world, they’ll cut your hands off.

Thanks to Daily Kos

ABC News did its own version of Candid Camera, recently. Several actors enacted a scene in a coffee house – two deaf job applicants applying for a kitchen position, and a manager telling them not to bother. I’m happy to relate that many customers reacted with disgust to what they were hearing. A few even confronted the manager and one coffee-drinker demonstrated the bracing merits of making a scene by doing it from across the room. But…

Three people, all of them in either recruitment or human resources, scurried up to the manager afterwards to advise, in discreetly lowered voices, on the “correct” way to handle it. The correct response, they explained, is to just accept the application and then not call the applicant.

I doubt most black or Hispanic viewers, most disabled viewers, or many female viewers, are shocked by this revelation. Those comments about the influence of the deaf as a group (“they have more rights than anyone in the world, ” “They’ll cut your hands off”) are especially familiar. When I worked in corporate America, I frequently heard wildly exaggerated anecdotes painting women, blacks, the disabled, etc. as powerful forces before which employers must cower. Why this amazing clout has still not translated into equitable income and employment levels is a mystery.

There are two points I’d like to make. First, this is why Affirmative Action is necessary. Employers and recruiters are quite capable of writing “don’t bother” on applications and, when asked about the dearth of minorities, women, etc., batting their eyes innocently and insisting that they just couldn’t find anyone in those groups who were qualified. AA acknowledges that reality. Without it, laws against racial and sexual discrimination would barely be worth the paper they’re printed on.

And second, anyone looking for a job, including white males with no physical disability, should be concerned about this. More and more employers are screening out the jobless or those with credit problems. “Not a fit” can end up being written on your application too, not because of your qualifications or your ability, but because you are unemployed and/or in debt.

Crossposted from ThoughtcrimesThoughtcrimes

Comments

[mijan.livejournal.com]

More and more people are FINALLY sitting up and paying attention. Sure, plenty of assholes are still in the "it's not hurting me, so I don't care" camp, but more people ARE starting to pay attention and see the injustice. And even if not many people listen this time around, a few more will. Each time you can get a few more people to listen, you improve the overall situation.

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Or you know maybe it is those self same anti discrimination laws that cause this problem.

I mean really, who in their right mind would want to hire an employee that they know they essentially cannot fire or lay off should they need to without asking for a very expensive lawsuit that even if they win will cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

The problem that you and most liberals always overlook is the unintended consequences of your feel good laws. Sure people discriminating against any group of choice when it comes to hiring and other job decisions is a bad thing, but providing them with extra legal protections just creates a catch 22 where companies are damned if they do hire them and damned if they don't so they go to every length possible to avoid hiring them while staying within the letter of the law.

[paft.livejournal.com]

r: I mean really, who in their right mind would want to hire an employee that they know they essentially cannot fire or lay off should they need to without asking for a very expensive lawsuit that even if they win will cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

Baloney. I've noticed no dearth of African Americans, women, or the disabled being let go by employers. Plenty of owners can -- and do -- fire and/or lay off female, minority, and disabled employees.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

As someone who's disabled myself, those kind of people can go fuck themselves as far as I'm concerned.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

they know they essentially cannot fire or lay off should they need to without asking for a very expensive lawsuit that even if they win will cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

Source?

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

Social engineering often has that effect.
Recently, the owner of a small company in Mississauga, Ontario that gets federal money to assist immigrant women had a Human Rights Tribunal fine her and order her house seized. She had fired someone who was visually impaired, among other things. Fortunately, the case was overturned by the Ontario’s Superior Court, who called the tribunal’s decision “fatally flawed.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/the-case-of-the-smelly-lunch/article1892245

I will bet that she will tread very carefully in future when making hiring decisions.

[eracerhead.livejournal.com]

The situation for many employers is that they are deathly afraid of the expense of both litigation and conforming with the nebulous requirements of "reasonable accommodation." Anyone who is perceived as increasing that risk will give any manager pause. This isn't because companies haven't been sued over it. These laws were written one-sidedly. If we really want the problem solved, we need to also limit liability on behalf of employers.

[paft.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've heard that one too. Sorry, but as someone who's worked with the disabled, I don't buy it.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

The real situation is most of them are cheap dicks who want to get out of the ADA any way they possibly can.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Ah, yes....Ableism. No doubt like racism it only exists in the minds of whiney failures and the real victims are the abled white people who are put upon by the evil forces of liberal islamofascicommunazism that seek to turn the USA into a Satanic Communist StateTM.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

"Rules are keeping people from hiring! We need more rules!"

[paft.livejournal.com]

What rules would prevent a manager from hiring a deaf or hard of hearing job applicant for kitchen work?

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

They've been doing this for decades. My dad always told me about how his white-only company gets around the rules: they advertise in non-white spaces/areas and then ignore anything and everything from that source. They show how many non-white applications they consider, and they don't hire a single one. My dad hired a black janitor. He was told it was the worst thing he ever did for his career, and that he had 30 days to fire him or lose his job.

This shit goes on everyday, everywhere. Old white men own old white companies (I'm talking about mid-sized private companies) and they will not hire a non-white person. They just won't. We just have to wait until they die off or something.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Exactly, you can't turn a racist into a non-racist by making laws and rules. You have to wait until they die off, and hope that you fixed the next generation. Although, making all these rules in the meantime often means you won't have fixed the next generation.

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

Oh don't feel so isolated now *there there*

FYI - everyone knows that in certain places (i.e. california) certain jobs (i.e. medical, clinical, etc.) are attained by the who-you-know system. And, well, since Chinese know more Chinese, and Punjabi tend to know other Punjabi, and Phillipinos have connections with many other Phillipinos.......Le voilà!

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

Why this amazing clout has still not translated into equitable income and employment levels is a mystery.

This stems from not knowing how to carry one's weight around!


p.s. i believe it can be done in a tactful manner.

[paft.livejournal.com]

What do you mean? Are you saying that black people as a group, women as a group, and the disabled as a group don't know "how to carry one's weight around?"

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

If anyone is surprised at this, then they do not work in American business. Both small business and corporations do this.

[pmax3.livejournal.com]

Affirmative Action is a good policy as long as the numbers (for the quantum and manner of reservation etc.) are set correctly. Without it, people who are currently discriminated against or are not hired because of general negative perceptions about their social group are faced with decreased incentive and increased costs for making themselves qualified for the job (as the probability of being hired is low). This in turn rapidly decreases the overall qualification levels for that group, and a vicious cycle is created.

Affirmative action counters this phenomenon and benefits not just the society at large but also business by improving the quality and size of the labour pool over time.

The measures could include reduced qualification standards for the said social groups. Businesses may suffer in the short term, but it is necessary for everyone's long term good.

It seems the people mentioned by you are violating the law, and therefore must be acted against with strictness(can't watch the video right now, sorry!)

[headhouse.livejournal.com]

Oh, thank god. You listed your points. Well done.

(I'm leaving aside your yellow-journalism choice of terminology throughout the post. There's just too much. Do you even remember a time when you could manage objectivity?)

Your first and second points seem to combine to imply that white males with no job or bad credit could conceivably be protected as a systemically-persecuted minority under AA. Would you support that situation, if it arose?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Your first and second points seem to combine to imply that white males with no job or bad credit could conceivably be protected as a systemically-persecuted minority under AA. Would you support that situation, if it arose?

I'm not the OP, but I would be in support of laws that made it illegal to consider someone's credit rating as a qualification for hiring or not hiring.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

I've got a bit of a different take. HR is there to prevent their employers for being sued for AA, not to enforce the spirit of it. The advice these folks gave was very HR like. One of them did suggest that the guy should give the deaf applicant a try, which I'm guessing is more productive than calling him an asshole.

I'm certainly not saying that discrimination doesn't take place, I'm just saying this seems a bit oversold.

It's also silly to think that minority groups are not hired because employers fear that they will be unable to fire them if needed. You need to be just as careful if you fire a white guy as anyone else.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

The advice these folks gave was very HR like.

Which is why we have "HR departments" and not simply "Recruiting & Payroll" each new rule adds a new layer of overhead.

[bikinisquad3000.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, I saw this when it aired (that show is way more compelling than it should be). It was depressing as hell, but not much of a surprise.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

First, this is why Affirmative Action is necessary.

No, it's not. Affirmative Action has NOTHING to do with disabilities. Affirmative Action is about racial and gender equality. It's contradictory because people of a certain race or gender arguing against companies or organizations discriminating against them are asking those same companies or organizations to give them an extra leg-up, and in the process marginalizing someone else. That's NOT equality, no matter how you slice it.

ABC seemed to conveniently leave out an important detail - if a business has less than 15 employees, they may not be obligated to follow the guidelines of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but that can also depend on state guidelines.

I feel bad for people in that situation and hope that something can be done somehow to better accommodate those with disabilities.

[paft.livejournal.com]

MVL: Affirmative Action has NOTHING to do with disabilities. Affirmative Action is about racial and gender equality...

Affirmative Action is about the realities of discrimination, and the extent to which bigots of every stripe will attempt to circumvent anti-discrimination laws.

MVL: It's contradictory because people of a certain race or gender arguing against companies or organizations discriminating against them are asking those same companies or organizations to give them an extra leg-up, and in the process marginalizing someone else.

White able-bodied males are not "marginalized" by Affirmative Action. They remain well ahead when it comes to income and employment.

mvl: ABC seemed to conveniently leave out an important detail - if a business has less than 15 employees, they may not be obligated to follow the guidelines of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but that can also depend on state guidelines.

So what? The unfairness and bigotry remains, as does the dishonesty of those people who advised the "manager" to lie.