The overall concern of this study is that of substantive equality, as defined by Canadian law, in the employment context, and the specific goal of this study is to provide a model to assess (and prevent) unlawful systemic discrimination in an assessment center. Because discrimination is essentially the same, wherever it occurs, the model proposed in this study is also useful for assessing discrimination in employment selection generally. In the employment context, evidence of systemic discrimination is often limited to selection patterns, and so this study argues that statistical analyses can be particularly useful. Since the Supreme Court adopted the effects theory, where intent is immaterial and the focus is on results, such analyses are likely to become an appealing alternative to traditional arguments of exclusion and disproportion. The analytic model proposed here suggests two general phases to a legal analysis of discrimination. First, there is the preliminary phase, which consists of three interrelated steps: identifying the applicable selection procedure, identifying the relevant legal issue, and identifying the appropriate groups for comparison. Second, there is the assessment phase, which consists of two sequential steps: comparing the groups of interest on the dimension of interest to determine if differences exist, and analyzing observed differences to determine if they are legally or practically significant. It is in this phase that statistical analyses can be especially helpful in an assessment of systemic discrimination. To test its utility, the proposed model was applied to the Justice Institute of British Columbia Police Academy assessment center (where entry level police applicants are screened) to determine whether the assessment center discriminated on the basis of sex. Of particular interest to the Police Academy is that the results indicated no sex discrimination, but notably the results also indicated that the proposed model provides a practicable and relatively uncomplicated way to assess discrimination. Moreover, consistent with the goal of prevention, this study demonstrates how a reliability assessment can provide important information about the potential for discrimination in employee selection, thereby providing employers with the means to be more proactive than otherwise possible. / Education, Faculty of / Educational Studies (EDST), Department of / Graduate

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This study sought to update the literature on gender and negotiations, generate new information on settlements in negotiations, and provide information on gender and competitive negotiations. The negotiation section of the CAMCO competition was used to determine the influence of gender on negotiated settlement. Settlements did not differ based on the gender of the negotiators, except in scenario two in which it was found that male/male dyads negotiate a less distributive outcome than female/female or mixedsex dyads. In all scenarios, male/male dyads did not settle with an impasse more often than women, and male negotiators in a mixedsex dyad did not negotiate a more winning settlement than women negotiators. The results of the study imply that businesses can feel free to hire men and women negotiators based on their individual qualifications instead of based on their gender. The results also raise some concerns about the perception of differences between men and women based on outdated stereotypes.

A central feature of sexual harassment in the workplace is that it essentially involves two sides of a coin an impairment of dignity, self-esteem, self-worth, respect, ubuntu, individual autonomy, and equality from a positive aspect and freedom from insult, degrading treatment, disrespect, abuse of trust and unfair discrimination from a negative aspect. The overlap between equality and dignity as founding values of the Constitution, constitutionally entrenched rights, and values underpinning the limitation clause in the Constitution is explored with a view to illustrating why sexual harassment is unacceptable in an open and democratic South Africa. The central theme of the thesis is that the future of the law on sexual harassment lies in the adoption of a multi-dimensional approach which focuses on dignity/ ubuntu because there can never be equality without respect for dignity/ ubuntu which is an essential pillar in the celebration of self-autonomy and humanity in a democratic society. A central focus of the research is that the harm of sexual harassment gives rise to various remedies, which are not mutually exclusive. The plaintiff can use one or more of the available remedies because sexual harassment is potentially a labour issue; a constitutional rights matter; a delict; unfair discrimination and can even manifest itself as a specific offence in criminal law. A wide range of data collection methods were used including reference to South African judicial precedent; legislation; selected foreign case law; the Constitution; textbooks; journal articles; feminist theories; and international conventions. The aim is to underscore the impairment suffered by women through sexual harassment, which includes economic harm, psychological harm, unfair discrimination, work sabotage, unequal access to employment opportunities and abuse of organizational power by supervisors. The multiple facets of the harm of sexual harassment such as treating women as sub-human, un-equal and as sub-citizens in total disregard of their constitutional rights, self-autonomy and ubuntu is highlighted in an effort to identify the essence of sexual harassment. The judicial tests, which determine whose perception of the nature of sexual harassment is decisive, are described. The focal point of the thesis advocates a judicial test for identifying sexual harassment, which is gender neutral, objective, and promotes the objects, purport, and spirit of the Bill of Rights by offering equal protection before the law. A critique of the current law on sexual harassment in South Africa is conducted in the light of the common-law principles of vicarious liability. An evaluation is made of how and to what extent the South African case law is compatible with Canadian and English authorities. This was done by broadening the scope of employment test to include approaches compatible with an abuse of power and trust; frolic of one's own; enterprise risk; mismanagement of duties; and abuse of supervisory authority and the sufficiently close nexus between the wrongful conduct and the employment. The United States supervisory harassment approach, which focuses on sexual harassment as an abuse of power or trust in employment relations, is critically regarded as having truly captured the essence of the risk of abuse inherent in the supervisor's delegated power. Statutory vicarious liability in terms of labour law is underscored because it is distinct from the common-law principles of vicarious liability in creating an element of deemed personal liability on the part of the employer for failure to take steps and ensure the eradication of gender discrimination. It is observed that women cannot be liberated as a class (gender equality) if they are not liberated as autonomous individuals (dignity). It is concluded that South African law is in harmony with the Canadian and English authorities on sexual harassment in the workplace and has the potential to deal adequately with sexual harassment cases in the workplace but only if attention is paid to the proposed emphasis and suggestions made in the thesis.

The purpose of the present study was to elucidate the complexity of modern-day hiring discrimination against gay men. This is the first study known to the author that experimentally manipulated gender presentation (feminine or masculine), sexual orientation (gay or heterosexual), and job type (gay- and female-typed or heterosexual- and male-typed) to examine their collective effect on hiring recommendation. Furthermore, much remains to be understood about how descriptive and prescriptive stereotypes operate to explain hiring discrimination against gay men. Drawing on implicit inversion theory, social cognitive career theory, and the lack of fit model, a descriptive stereotype model was proposed to investigate the influence of descriptive stereotypes (perceptions of communality and agency) about male subtypes (gender presentation-sexual orientation combinations), in conjunction with occupational stereotypes about the extent to which different male subtypes are believed to occupy specific job types, on perceptions of job fit and hiring recommendation. Drawing on expectancy violation theory, a prescriptive stereotype model was also proposed to explore the influence of stereotypical expectations about male subtypes, and male subtype-job type combinations, on consequences of prescriptive stereotype violation (perceptions of respect) and hiring recommendation. Sexual orientation did not have an effect in the descriptive or prescriptive stereotype models. However, results of the descriptive stereotype model revealed that perceptions of job fit decreased when gender presentation misaligned with job type (feminine-presenting men who applied to the heterosexual- and male-typed job and masculine-presenting men who applied to the gay- and female-typed job). Evidence of moderated mediation indicated that when applying to the heterosexual- and male-typed job, feminine-presenting men were seen as less agentic, and thus received lower ratings for hiring recommendation, than masculine-presenting men. In contrast, when applying to the gay- and female-typed job, masculine-presenting men were seen as less communal, and thus received lower ratings for hiring recommendation, than feminine-presenting men. These findings suggest that perceptions of agency and communality, and job fit, were serial mediators that positively correlated with hiring recommendation. Evidence of moderated mediation for the prescriptive stereotype model occurred only for the gay- and female-typed job, revealing that masculine-presenting men were less respected, and thus received lower ratings for hiring recommendation, than feminine-presenting men. Follow-up research to develop and refine the proposed descriptive and prescriptive stereotype models is crucial to furthering our understanding of hiring discrimination against gay men in today’s organizations.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / While gender equality in the workplace is slowly improving, discrimination still exists. Past research has shown that women are underrepresented in both high status jobs, as well as stereotypically masculine careers. Two theories which explain gender discrimination –Lack of Fit Theory and Status Incongruence Hypothesis—have been widely supported but are rarely researched simultaneously. In this study participants rated hypothetical male and female job candidates applying to a hypothetical job that was either high status or low status, and in masculine domain or a feminine domain. Neither Lack of Fit nor Status Incongruence Hypothesis were fully supported. However, participants rated candidates applying for jobs in the feminine domain as less competent, hireable, and likeable. Participants also found high status candidates less hireable than low status candidates. These results suggest that within this study gender discrimination was more specific than robust, meaning research design should allow for detection of such nuanced discrimination.