Job Assignments in Nebraska
|
HR
Management |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Labor
Laws |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Our Nebraska company has the policy of assigning black store managers only to stores in predominantly black neighborhoods. Is this discrimination, or common sense?
Placing a black manager in a store where the neighborhood is predominantly black may seem to make sense, but it’s discrimination.
According to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically Title VII of that law, discriminating against persons because of color, race, national origin, religion or sex is illegal. Hiring and promoting practices–including assignments of personnel–are protected under that law.
Understand that when an employer searches for a candidate to fill a job opening, he/she must consider everyone who’s qualified. Race, color, sex, religion and nationality are not relevant in the selection process.
Title VII provides employees with a wide range of protections. Not only does the law prohibit discrimination in the hiring practice, but also disallows it any aspect of his/her job. Occupational training, salary, advancement, even the manner an employee is fired is protected. Plus, eligibility for health insurance, leave from work and other benefits fall under Title VII.
In the case of workplace discrimination, the employee would turn to the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) to investigate the complaint. If the complaint is found to be valid, the EEOC would then file suit on behalf of the complainant.
A recent suit filed by the EEOC against Walgreen,
America’s largest chain of drugstores, is a case in point. Walgreen stores in Detroit, St. Louis, Tampa and Kansas City were charged by the EEOC with race discrimination. Several African American pharmacists and managers complained that they only received promotions for openings at Walgreens stores located in African American neighborhoods. This act limited their opportunities for employment and advancement. In addition, many of these stores had sub par financial performance, meaning the potential earnings for the managers and pharmacists were also limited.
The original suit quickly expanded into a nationwide class action suit, involving over 10,000 current and former Walgreen employees. The suit never went to trial. Walgreen, instead of admitting their error, chose to settle out of court for $20 million. JH
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, October 24th, 2007 at 2:32 pm and is filed under
Hiring and Staffing, Human Resources Management, Labor Laws.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply
-
Ask a Question
Categories
- Attendance Management (797)
- Benefits (1209)
- Compensation (1186)
- Employment Training (292)
- Hiring and Staffing (715)
- Human Resources Management (1873)
- Labor Laws (1031)
- Management / Leadership Development (292)
- Performance Management (177)
- Structural Development (41)
- Termination (419)
- Workplace Health & Safety (218)
- Workplace Management (392)
Blogroll
Archives
Recent Posts
-
Employee Separation
November 20th, 2008 -
Maternity leave
November 20th, 2008 -
What comes next…after you terminate an employee?
November 20th, 2008 -
When can you implement a salary cap on a position whether it\’s exempt or non exempt?
November 20th, 2008 -
What is COBRA and who gets it?
November 20th, 2008 -
FMLA backdating guidelines in Las Vegas, Nevada
November 19th, 2008 -
Sick Pay
November 19th, 2008
Pages