Posted by marykeating on November 30, 2011 under Collective rights | 
The Fourth Circuit called out an employer for firing an employee in violation of her rights to engage in concerted activity with other employees. This case did not involve facebook, but like those cases, the employee’s right to share grievances with coworkers trumped an employment policy.
In NLRB v. White Oak Manor, an employee wore a hat to work to cover an embarrassing haircut. After a few days (before the haircut had grown out enough, apparently), she was ordered to remove the hat. She complained that others were allowed to wear hats, and that the dress code was not enforced fairly. She was written up. The employee still felt unfairly treated. She took pictures of employees who wore hats without being reprimanded, and otherwise violated the company’s dress code by displaying tattoos. She discussed the pictures, and the employer’s unequal enforcement of its rules with other employees. The employer fired her for taking pictures.
The Fourth Circuit agreed with the National Labor Relations Board that the employee’s efforts to win converts to her side was concerted activity. Employees griping, uniting, or discussing terms and conditions of employment all fall under protected activity, and firing them for getting together violates the National Labor Relations Act. This includes both dress codes and discipline. The court rejected the employer’s contentions that the employee raised the concerns and took the pictures only in her self-interest. “Equitable enforcement of a dress code definitionally benefits all.”
Posted by marykeating on November 11, 2011 under Discrimination in employment, Economic situation, veterans' discrimination |
Despite the protection of one of the strongest laws prohibiting discrimination (USERRA), veterans (and current members) of the armed forces experience higher unemployment rates than the rest of the population. The Department of Labor has rolled out a couple of resources that could prove helpful in reintegrating veterans in civilian society.
The first is called “My Next Move for Veterans.” The website asks for the veteran’s military occupation code, and gives some guidance on jobs in the private or public sector that make use of the same skills.
The second is a veteran’s job bank, offering job listings from companies specifically looking for veterans as their next hire.
It is harder to prove discrimination in the failure to hire someone. If a veteran is turned down for a job, he or she is usually not told why, and doesn’t have the inside knowledge to show it was veteran status. Perhaps employers fear that the employees will be recalled to duty, that they came back damaged, that they won’t take direction from a non-military boss. If these resources help veterans find employment, that would help us honor their service.
Posted by marykeating on November 4, 2011 under Sex-based discrimination |
A recent study commissioned by a Wall Street law firm found convincing evidence that the firm assigned higher evaluation points to male associates for the same attributes and qualities as the females possessed. The firm must have had an inkling that men were getting an undeserved edge over the women, otherwise it would not have hired the consultant. It was right: women who performed just as well as men, according to the open-ended narratives accompanying the evaluations, somehow earned a lower ranking than their male peers.
Acknowledging that the differential was narrow, the authors point out the high-stakes consequence: “the firm’s reliance on this number for partnership consideration makes it nearly three times more likely that men than women will be promoted to partner.”
Despite the finding, the law firm chose not to revamp its system, institute training, or take any creative steps to erase the ingrained bias. The firm apparently gave lip service to the idea of improving its record of promoting women, but “we’d rather not change anything.”
Although the identity of the firm is a secret under the consultant’s agreement, I never underestimate the power of the grapevine; its identity may yet leak out, which could yield an interesting situation for the scores of women held back by the firm in spite of its realization that its evaluations were biased.
