 |
 |
|
| EEO Compliance Must Apply to Everyone |
|
The Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) act ensures that businesses comply with the laws, regulations, and policies that prohibit discrimination in the federal workplace based on race, color, national origin, religion, gender, age, disability, or reprisal. Penalties for violating Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations are severe.
 Effective 2007, the EEO-1 report has been revised. The new survey, due September 30, 2007, endorses employee self-identification of race and ethnicity, rather than asking employers to rely on visual identification. In addition, Hawaiian employers for the first time are responsible for collecting race and ethnicity information.
The EEO-1 report must be filed annually by employers with 100 or more workers, or employers with federal government contracts of $50,000 or more and 50 or more employees. The report gives the government workforce profiles by ethnicity, gender, and race split into job categories.
The new job categories divide officials and managers into two levels: executive/senior-level, and first/mid-level.
The new race and ethnic categories include:
- two or more races, not Hispanic or Latino
- Asians, not Hispanic or Latino
- Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, not Hispanic or Latino
Although employers are not required to resurvey their entire workforce, the EEOC anticipates that many companies will choose to do so to make certain that their data is accurate. Employers should let employees know that this request for identification is voluntary, and the information collected, whether by paper or in electronic format, must be kept confidential.
For more information about EEO compliance, click here to download a free HR compliance report. |
|
 - Recent News |
|
|
|
On October 1, the EEOC filed suit against a Westchester County, New York, hospital that it claims would not give a diabetic nurse a consistent work schedule. The woman’s doctor had advised her that it’d be easier for her to control her disability if she worked three consecutive days rather than every other day. According to the suit, at first the hospital accommodated her but then changed its mind. The hospital denies any wrongdoing.
In mid September, the EEOC was given permission by a federal court to proceed to trial with a gender discrimination case against L.A. Weight Loss Centers, Inc. that alleges that the company displayed a pattern of disparate treatment against men when recruiting, hiring, and assigning employees. The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland rejected L.A. Weight Loss’ motions to dismiss the case and granted partial summary judgment to the EEOC on its charge that the company did not maintain relevant records on employees. In addition, the EEOC claims that L.A. Weight Loss fired a trainer with the company because she attempted to hire male applicants and because she complained that the company did not hire qualified male applicants because of their gender.
On September 20th, the EEOC filed a discrimination case against United Parcel Service, Inc., stating that the company did not accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs by expecting him to work on the Sabbath when he’d requested that time off. Although he’d been accommodated for 5 years, his request was refused when the facility changed management in 2005. The man was told that he’d be fired for job abandonment if he left the job early. The EEOC is asking that UPS give the man back his job and back pay with interest, among other things.
A $57 million settlement has been approved by a judge in a case against Sprint Nextel Corp. claiming that older employees were targeted during companywide layoffs. The lawsuit, brought on behalf of 1,697 former employees, alleged that the company, then known as Sprint Corp., illegally moved employees aged 40 and up to positions that were then eliminated as part of the company’s planned cutbacks. The company has said that this is not true, but decided to settle the case to avoid further legal expenses.
In September, the EEOC filed suit against a San Jose-based manufacturer for firing a black technician who complained when a coworker played and sang along to music that the plaintiff found to be racially offensive. According to the suit, the EEOC is asking for back pay and compensatory and punitive damages.
In August, Nike Inc. settled a class-action lawsuit by agreeing to pay $7.6 million in a racial discrimination case at its Niketown store in downtown Chicago. About 400 current and former African American employees brought the suit, claiming that Nike gave its black employees the lowest-level and worst-paid jobs, denied them equal chances for promotions, denied employee benefits to minorities by hiring them for primarily part-time positions, and disciplined employees in a racially based way. Nike also agreed to allow a court-appointed diversity consultant to observe and communicate with the court and to appoint a compliance officer at company headquarters. At the same time, Nike says it denies all allegations of wrongdoing in the case.
A federal court jury recently awarded a hearing-impaired former Subway restaurant manager $165,500 after the EEOC accused the franchise holder of creating a disability-based hostile work environment. The EEOC sued BobRich Enterprises under the Americans with Disabilities Act, stating that the restaurant owner and his HR/training manager subjected Tammy Gitsham to teasing and name calling because she is hearing impaired and wears hearing aids. Gitsham had worked as an area supervisor for Subway for a year and a half, and managed between 5 and 10 stores for the franchise.
|
|
|
 DOWNLOAD: Understanding the new requirements for workforce diversity reporting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: Prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, in public services, in public accommodations, and in telecommunications. |
|
|
Civil Rights Act of 1991: Parties involved in a discrimination case can request jury trials, and compensatory and punitive damages can be recovered. |
|
|
VETS-100: Requires any contractor or subcontractor with the federal government for $25,000 or more to hire and promote qualified Vietnam-era veterans, special disabled veterans, and any veteran who served on active duty. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A worker can collect lost wages and prejudgment interest, liquidated/double damages, compensatory damages, and punitive damages. |
|
|
Fines for violating EEO compliance regulations can run, per person, from $50,000 to $300,000. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|