APPLICANT TRACKING, SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION AND THE NEW, IMPROVED EEOC AND OFCCP



Similar documents
COLORADO EMPLOYMENT LAW SUMMIT

HIRING AND SELECTION Enforcement Priorities and Litigation Trends

The SHRM LI Breakfast Series

You Are Served : Litigation In The Workplace

Application of EEO Record-Keeping and Affirmative Action Requirements to Temporary Employees

National Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force

Adverse Impact Analysis

EPLI LITIGATION: WHEN THE EEOC COMES CALLING

To Battle or Not to Battle the EEOC s Recent Tactics Time to Take a Stand!

Human Resources Training

Employment Practices Liability Insurance

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

How To Get A Job At Ats

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Elaine McArthur Outreach and Training Manager

EEOC Stats. Preparing & Responding to EEOC Charges

Ending Sex and Race Discrimination in the Workplace:

Data Privacy and Security: A Primer for Law Firms

EEOC-Denver Field Office

A Just Alternative or Just an Alternative? Mediation and the Americans with Disabilities Act

lead counsel for the class in this action. I have been licensed to Prior to entering private practice, I worked for the United States

Employment Practices Liability Insurance Claims are on the rise. Are you protected?

Navigating Through the EEOC Process

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Complaint & Investigation Guideline Number b-AOG Responsible Office Human Resources Date Revised 01/30/2014

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Windmill Inns of America, d/b/a Windmill Inn of Ashland, Defendant.

The Evolution of HR Audits

The Federal EEO Process

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Terminating the Employment Relationship in the U.S. and France

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CONSENT DECREE. Introduction

EEOC and Employer Considerations on Title VII and the Strategic Enforcement Plan

GUIDE to the BASIC EEO Requirements Under Executive Order for SMALL BUSINESSES WITH FEDERAL CONTRACTS

Littler s Government Contractors Industry Group

Guide to the Basic EEO Requirements under Executive Order for Small Businesses with Federal Contracts

Employers Guide to Best Practices. For Use of Background Checks in Employment Decisions. Copyright 2010 Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law

Reclassifying Exempt Employees: Navigating Wage and Hour Pitfalls

WHAT POLICIES SHOULD AN EMPLOYER HAVE IN PLACE TO PREVENT LAWSUITS?

Dodd-Frank s Whistleblower Bounty Provisions: The First Wave of Tips Filed with the SEC and What Public Companies Should Do Now

CLASS TITLE: EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY SPECIALIST 1

SAMPLE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM (AAP)

CLASS SPECIFICATION DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES/LABOR RELATIONS

Understanding Employment Laws for Federal Contractors

Applicant Tracking & Disposition: What Recruiters Need To Know About Their Decisions

Employee Handbooks/ Document Retention Investigations

Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act Report. Fiscal Years United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Five-Year Strategic Plan

Human Resources Compliance Library. A comprehensive online library of authoritative HR compliance resources

CLAIMS AGAINST TELEPHONE ANSWERING SERVICES: THE TRILOGY OF PREVENTION, HANDLING AND RESOLUTION PART TWO: WHAT TO DO WHEN A CLAIM HAPPENS

Harry E. Owens, IPMA-CP Adjunct Faculty, University of Georgia. U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission 1

J.V. Industrial Companies, Ltd. Dispute Resolution Process. Introduction

How To Understand The Benefits Of An Applicant Tracking System

Compensation Analysis: Total Compensation

EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY INSURANCE MAINFORM APPLICATION

Compensation Analysis of 3 Advanced Data Modeling

EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY INSURANCE APPLICATION

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE DIRECTIVE /6/04 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

CHECKLIST OF EMPLOYMENT ISSUES FOR DUE DILIGENCE. Employment Law Perspective on Mergers and Acquisitions

SUMMARY OF KEY PROVISIONS UNDER FEDERAL, STATE, and CITY EEO LAWS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CONSENT DECREE. Introduction

Call Center Class Actions and what we can learn from them. Subject to the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Privilege

PLEASE NOTE: THIS POLICY WILL END EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 10, 2013 AND WILL BE REPLACED BY THE INTERACTIVE RESOLUTION POLICY ON NOVEMBER 11, 2013.

CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION EXAMPLE

NFL, RETIRED PLAYERS RESOLVE CONCUSSION LITIGATION; COURT-APPOINTED MEDIATOR HAILS HISTORIC AGREEMENT. Thousands of Retirees and Families to Benefit

Background Checks Do they Minimize your Risk or Add to it?

Minimizing Employee Retaliation: Do the Right Thing! Ashley E. Bonner, WSO-CST Senior Risk Control Consultant Trident Public Risk Solutions

WELCOME. EEO Laws That Impact Small Businesses. Michelle Crew. By Michelle Crew, Settlement Officer U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT ADA/FEHA LITIGATION*

SCAN Health Plan Policy and Procedure Number: CRP-0067, False Claims Act & Deficit Reduction Act 2005

FINANCIAL REFORM LEGISLATION OFFERS WHISTLEBLOWERS LUCRATIVE INCENTIVES AND ROBUST PROTECTION. Philip H. Hilder 1 Sunida A.

Transcription:

APPLICANT TRACKING, SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION AND THE NEW, IMPROVED EEOC AND OFCCP Speaker: Mickey Silberman, Esq. Jackson Lewis LLP Managing Partner, Denver Office silbermm@jacksonlewis.com (303) 225-2400

Introductory Statement THE MATERIALS CONTAINED IN THIS PRESENTATION WERE PREPARED BY THE LAW FIRM OF JACKSON LEWIS LLP FOR THE PARTICIPANTS OWN REFERENCE IN CONNECTION WITH EDUCATION SEMINARS PRESENTED BY JACKSON LEWIS LLP. ATTENDEES SHOULD CONSULT WITH COUNSEL BEFORE TAKING ANY ACTIONS AND SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THESE MATERIALS OR DISCUSSIONS THEREABOUT TO BE LEGAL OR OTHER ADVICE. 2

About the Firm Jackson Lewis LLP is dedicated to representing management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. With 34 offices nationwide, the firm has a national perspective and sensitivity to the nuances of regional business environments. Guided by the principle that a positive work environment results in enhanced morale and increased productivity, the firm devotes a significant portion of its practice to management education and preventive programs. This approach helps limit exposure to grievances, charges and lawsuits. www.jacksonlewis.com 3

About the Presenter: Mickey Silberman Mickey Silberman is a Senior Member of Jackson Lewis Affirmative Action/Diversity Practice Group and is the Managing Partner of the firm s Denver, Colorado office. Mickey represents management exclusively in all areas of employment law and specializes in EEO, affirmative action and diversity. During the past few years, Mickey has directed the defense of hundreds of OFCCP audits and EEOC systemic discrimination investigations throughout the country. He spends much of his time counseling employers regarding the strategic design and development of applicant tracking, pre-employment testing and other hiring procedures in response to the OFCCP s new Internet Applicant Rule and the EEOC s increased focus on hiring discrimination. 4

Applicant Tracking and Systemic Discrimination: The New Rules For many years, employers (government contractors in particular) have had the obligation to maintain race and gender data of employment applicants However, the government EEO enforcement agencies, EEOC and OFCCP, historically did not pay much attention to applicant tracking data and it typically was not a focus during discrimination investigations During the past few years, all that has changed Now, the EEOC and OFCCP are intently focusing on applicant trends and often bringing back huge financial settlements from those investigations So why the big change? Let s take a look 5

Applicant Tracking and Systemic Discrimination: The New Rules (continued) Several factors have emerged during the past few years to create a perfect storm to make applicant tracking convoluted for employers Technology happened Employers have dramatically increased the use of preemployment tests and the use of third-party vendors to administer aspects of the applicant process such as drug screens, criminal background checks, etc. EEOC and OFCCP have refocused their enforcement efforts to seek broad patterns of adverse impact in employers hiring processes so they can uncover hidden barriers to equal employment opportunity Let s explore each of these. 6

Applicant Tracking and Systemic Discrimination: The New Rules (continued) The Internet and other electronic technologies have radically transformed the applicant tracking landscape Historically, employers tracked applicant data by hand on a hardcopy applicant flow log or manually inputted the data into an electronic spreadsheet Typically, the data included on the these applicant flow logs was minimalistic and did not (1) include detailed information about the hiring stage at which each applicant fell out of the process or (2) the reasons why each applicant was not selected However, during the past several years, employers have dramatically increased the use of on-line automated applicant tracking systems and the use internal applicant databases that allow employers to (1) efficiently store huge amounts of detailed data and (2) easily retrieve and analyze the data as they consider applicants for employment 7

Applicant Tracking and Systemic Discrimination: The New Rules (continued) The Internet and other electronic technologies have radically transformed the applicant tracking landscape (continued) The effect of these developing technologies is that employers now can quickly and easily analyze large amounts of applicant data to determine who is most qualified for employment openings But, employers are not the only ones who can broadly and deeply analyze the data. Third parties such as the EEOC, OFCCP and private plaintiffs attorneys can demand the same detailed data and can easily manipulate it to determine if applicants from protected groups (such as minorities and females) are disproportionately rejected for employment openings and the reasons for those rejections Unsuspecting employers often design these sophisticated electronic applicant tracking processes without regard to the consequences from a legal perspective (more to come on that below) 8

Applicant Tracking and Systemic Discrimination: The New Rules (continued) Employers have dramatically increased the use of preemployment tests. Additionally, employers are increasingly using third-party vendors to administer the tests as well as drug-screens, criminal background checks, etc. Employers have gravitated to pre-employment tests because they assume they are a neutral, objective selection devise However, pre-employment tests can often be a trap for the unwary. Typically these are off-the-shelf tests purchased from a third-party and it is often difficult to show that the test is truly predictive of success for the employer s specific job Third-party vendors increasingly are being retained to administer distinct stages of the applicant process on an employer s behalf [such as criminal background checks] and generally maintain electronic data in systems specifically designed to easily generate detailed reports. Unfortunately, these reports can be used against the employer by the EEOC, OFCCP and private plaintiffs counsel 9

EEOC s Increased Focus on Systemic Discrimination These revolutionary changes have coincided with the EEOC s and OFCCP s increasingly changed focus from compliance agencies focused on one-zees and two-zees to robust enforcement agencies seeking out systemic discrimination In 2005, the EEOC established the Systemic Discrimination Task Force to substantially enhance the EEOC s focus on class-action type discrimination The Task Force researched the EEOC s systemic discrimination work and found: The EEOC did not effectively use its access to employment data (including applicant data) to identify systemic discrimination The EEOC lacked the appropriate technology to support systemic litigation The EEOC was not appropriately staffing its systemic discrimination cases with expert statisticians, testing specialists and attorneys 10

EEOC s Increased Focus on Systemic Discrimination (continued) On April 4, 2006, recognizing that the Commission could not effectively combat discrimination without a strong nationwide systemic program, the EEOC unanimously voted to shift the EEOC s emphasis to the investigation and litigation of systemic discrimination The Commission is now more focused on investigating neutral policies and practices that have a disparate impact upon protected groups than it had been previously This enhanced focus on disparate impact has brought employers applicant and hiring processes directly into the EEOC s sights 11

EEOC s Increased Focus on Systemic Discrimination (continued) Since the adoption of the Task Force Recommendations on April 4, 2006, the EEOC has: Developed systemic discrimination plans for each of the 15 district offices aimed at identifying and prosecuting systemic discrimination Increased the filing of systemic discrimination litigation cases by 10% in 2006 Repeatedly re-emphasized the EEOC s focus on systemic litigation: The EEOC will seek to litigate systemic discrimination cases with broad impact and affecting a large number of workers. - Commissioner Earp, November 15, 2006 The EEOC will focus on systemic discrimination, but cases filed under the initiative are still a year or two away. - General Counsel Ronald Cooper, March 21, 2007 12

EEOC s Increased Focus on Systemic Discrimination The Results are In, and Growing EEOC Systemic Claims Commissioner charges signed Suit filings with 20+ victims Suit resolutions with 20+ victims Suit resolutions with 100+ victims FY 2006 FY 2007 11 24 11 14 7 20 0 4 13

Practical Implications of the EEOC s New Focus As part of its Systemic Discrimination Initiative, the EEOC increasingly has focused upon employers applicant and hiring processes Garden-variety individual failure-to-hire EEOC charges often grow into EEOC systemic investigations of employers overall applicant and hiring process. Often times, the employer s response to the Charge is the trigger for the systemic discrimination investigation We treated the Charging Party just like all other applicants defense can open the door to a systemic focus 14

The EEOC s Hot Selection Criteria The EEOC believes certain hiring criteria disproportionately have a disparate impact on racial/ethnic minorities or other protected groups including: Pre-employment tests Credit Reports Drug Screens Arrest and conviction records Current/pending prosecutions? Active warrants? 15

Traps for the Unwary: You re on the EEOC s Systemic Radar IF The EEOC will, in a Request for Information (RFI), request information concerning the applicability of policies or selection criteria to sites beyond the one referenced in the Charge The EEOC will request applicant trend data involving other applicants, other positions or other locations beyond that specified in the Charge Excel Spreadsheet on a CD-ROM The EEOC will request information about pre-employment test validation studies The EEOC will ask how the selection criterion is relevant to job performance The Charging Party (typically at the EEOC s prompting) separately will also initiate a charge against your third-party background check vendor/service 16

The New Improved OFCCP Until a few years ago, the OFCCP was an affirmative action compliance agency The OFCCP generally focused on technical paperwork issues related to good faith efforts, listing job openings with state employment services, proper postings on employee bulletin boards, etc. However, during the past few years, the OFCCP has fundamentally transformed itself into a systemic discrimination enforcement agency The OFCCP s focus today is on finding and eradicating systemic discrimination, focusing almost exclusively on the employers applicant and hire processes 17

The Genesis of the OFCCP s Enforcement Approach to Applicant and Hire Systemic Discrimination Since 2002, the OFCCP increasingly has also focused on systemic discrimination The OFCCP is seeking to identify and eradicate broad patterns of discrimination in employee selection processes and pay practices. The OFCCP will usually target applicant and hire process because that s where the big volume is The OFCCP no longer focused on technical issues or one-zees and two-zees The OFCCP wants to find and eradicate systemic problems The OFCCP seeking statistically significant indicators Red Flags. These Red Flags arise most often in applicant and hire data The OFCCP needs a legally sound enforcement approach. As a result, it published the Internet Applicant Rule in 2006 to clarify employers obligations to maintain and track applicant flow 18

Results from OFCCP s Increased Focus on Systemic Discrimination During the past few years, the OFCCP has used this changed enforcement approach to bring back increasingly larger monetary settlements. 2003 - $26,220,356 2004 - $34,479,294 2005 - $45,156,462 2006 - $51,525,235 2007 - $51,780,950.and obtain monetary settlements for more employees/applicants 2004-9,615 2005-14,761 2006-15,273 2007-22,251 For the dollars totals and employee/applicant numbers above, the vast majority resulted from settlements of applicant to hire adverse impact 19

The EEOC and OFCCP Muscle Up To increase the tools they have to investigate complex systemic discrimination claims, the OFCCP and EEOC have retained Ph.D.-level statisticians and testing experts These experts now work closely with OFCCP and EEOC attorneys to develop a systemic discrimination investigation plan early in the process if the agency believes there may be potential systemic issues in the applicant process Employers must be on the lookout for sign the enforcement agency statisticians and/or testing experts are involved in the case. If so, the agency is gearing up for class-action type litigation 20

Self-evaluations that reasonably meet the general standards will be found to be in compliance Contractors in compliance do not have to submit raw compensation data to the OFCCP in response to Item 11 of the OFCCP s Scheduling Notice Marginally reasonable self-evaluations will be subject to re-examination in subsequent audits OFCCP can offer written recommendations for improvement If not adopted, compliance coordination will not be obtained in future audits 21

Applicant Tracking Vulnerability Audit Given the increased employer use of electronic technologies to track applicant flow, the OFCCP s new Internet Applicant Rule and the agencies greatly increased focus on systemic discrimination in the applicant process employers should conduct a vulnerability audit, including a review of: Definition of Applicant and what electronic methods does the employer and/or its third-party vendors utilize to track data Compliance with the OFCCP s new Internet Applicant Rule Validity and defensibility of pre-employment tests, structured interviews and other selection tools The data the employer is tracking to identify the fall out selection stage for each applicant and the specific reason for falling out of the process Cloak the vulnerability audit under attorney-client privilege 20 22

QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION 23

24