Error: No such template "/hrDesign/network_profileHeader"!
Topic: Is this discrimination or quotas??? What is the risk???
Messages (3) Visitors (264)
Ken Smith
|
Is this discrimination or quotas??? What is the risk???
06-12-2007 / 2:25 pm #1
|
A friend of mine is a recruiter for a large company on the West Coast.
He recently shared his performance goals with me and asked about a
specific goal and its legality. His performance goals set diversity
recruiting targets and reward for meeting or exceeding these targets.
For example:
Increase minority representation by 5.9% or Increase female
representation by 3%. There is a specific bonus amount tied to meeting
or exceeding these goals. He mentioned that the company is not bound
by an Affirmative Action plan. He also was wondering if this was
legal. I thought these types of "goals" looked strange, but did not
want to give any advice without researching the matter further.
Does anyone have any thoughts or advice?
Thanks in advance!
|
|
|
Christine Packham
|
Re: Is this discrimination or quotas??? What is the risk???
06-19-2007 / 11:23 am #2
|
The company needs to have a documented and officially-sanctioned (by the EEOC) affirmative action plan before it can set quota targets. Until the EEOC reviews and approves your friend's company's affirmative action plans, any activities related to meeting these quota targets could be viewed as illegal discrimination by the EEOC.
|
|
|
Dennis Toles, MPA, SPHR
|
Re: Re: Is this discrimination or quotas??? What is the risk???
11-06-2007 / 2:03 pm #3
|
The previous answer implies the possibility of reverse discrimination liability, more so than assessing the essence of the attempt to pay recruiters for diversifying the organization. However, the advice is sound. The deeper problem here is that unless there are attempts to balance work populations using some type of criteria, there will be bias in the selection process that reflects the potentail for a type of "tyranny by the majority" that conserves the status quo inherent in organizational cultures of domestic corporations. Global corporations are aware of the need to have diversity for reasons of profitability and penetration of diverse markets. How we reach these goals and objectives in the current legalistic framework is the essence of the challenge. We often find ourselves more concerned with avoiding legal liability than achieving the goal of inclusiveness and diversity. The tendancies inherent in the ruling class are reflected in the employment laws and thus conservatism tends to rule the day. How is it that in a world where change is the only constant, we cannot seem to find an acceptable way to effectuate this type of change. Is it related to commitment or risk management? How can protected classes with competing demands be satisifed when essentially everyone now represents a protected class. It leads to grid lock in all aspects of our lives. The label of discrimination or quota is based upon the perspective of the observer, which is what we have in the complexities of enterprise resource planning and attempting to "analyze systems and outcomes". We need to keep trying, but be aware of the lives that are being trashed when procrastination and lack of change become protectionist strategies. We need to find a way together, otherwise stonewalling will continue and the culprit will be the false dichotomies set up in the language of our legalistic social environment. The answer lies therein. Recruiters are caught up in something bigger than their operational environment. However, we must do the best that we can. Education has similar constraints. We cannot afford to let these complex strategies keep us divided, our organizations and our human resources deserve affirmative actions that bust up log jams created when we get stuck in questions that do not have answers. Let's ask the right questions and come up with some answers.
|
|
|
