Whirlpool to pay $850,000 to settle race-bias charges
Amy Joyce:
Whirlpool Corp. will pay $850,000 to settle claims by the Labor Department that the company discriminated against 800 black job applicants. The company also will offer jobs to 48 rejected applicants.
Department investigators found, during a routine federal contract compliance evaluation, that the company's hiring practices disproportionately disqualified blacks applying for entry-level assembler positions or promotions at the company's Tulsa manufacturing facility.
The key was a multiple-choice screening test that eliminated from job consideration a higher percentage of black applicants than those from other groups. Whirlpool used the test from March 1, 1997, to Feb. 28, 1998.
Although an employer may use a test as a screening tool, if it eliminates a large number of applicants in a protected group in that process -- such as minorities -- the employer must conduct a study to ensure that the test is job-related.
The Test of Adult Basic Education given to the Whirlpool applicants contains multiple-choice questions that assess reading, math and English skills. The Labor Department found that not all the skills being tested for were vital for the entry-level jobs being filled.
I wonder if there are other countries in the world where it is legally required that people be financially compensated for the fact that they are not intelligent enough to pass an exam?
Whirlpool Employees Claim Racial Discrimination in Lawsuit
posted by Adam Lawson @ 12:26 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Although as far as settlements go this isn't big (others have been far higher), it's been pointed out that it's probably cheaper in the long run for companies to self-impose racial quotas in hiring:
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/quota_problem.htm
Something to think about.
it's been pointed out that it's probably cheaper in the long run for companies to self-impose racial quotas in hiring
I don't see how it is cheaper for either the employers or customers to have people employed in jobs that they are not qualified to do.
But can businesses be blamed for looking for opportunties outside the United States when they are burdened with stupid rules that undermine productivity?
This is one more reason why we need to get rid of employment laws whose only purpose is to reduce the unemployment rate amongst unqualified minorities. Jobs should go to those who are best suited to carrying them out regardless of race.
"I don't see how it is cheaper..."
Overall it's cheaper financially.
I don't think your comment that those who did not get these jobs were "not qualified" for them is accurate, in the sense that it's probably true that they could have done, or been successfully trained to do, these "entry-level assembler" jobs if given the chance; most of them could have, anyway.
But they didn't get a chance because other applicants scored better on a test. The problem arose because a disproportionate number of those who scored too low were black (a fact that should not really surprise anyone). So in this specific case it's almost certainly true that Whirlpool could've hired enough blacks -- including ones who underperformed on the pre-employment test -- to keep the feds away, and still had a competent, productive workforce.
Therefore it's not totally out there to say it may be cheaper in the long run to self-impose explicit quotas -- you save the costs of a possible EEOC investigation and any settlement.
This is what I meant.
Therefore it's not totally out there to say it may be cheaper in the long run to self-impose explicit quotas -- you save the costs of a possible EEOC investigation and any settlement
Of course, it would be cheaper still to get rid of useless organizations such as the EEOC.
Post a Comment
<< Home