In 2014, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reported multiple claims of workplace discrimination in the United States; the claims resulted in costly settlements. The purpose of this qualitative, multiple-case study—which used the theory of enterprise risk management as the conceptual framework—was to explore how 4 human resource managers in small-to-medium sized enterprises in the southeastern region of the United States successfully implemented proactive strategies to reduce the financial and legal risk resulting from workplace discrimination. Using Yin’s 5 steps of data analysis along with triangulation of findings from the semistructured interviews, company documents, and websites, the following 4 themes were identified and verified: the need for education, external accountability, formalized policies and procedures, and the barriers to proactive strategies. To reduce risks from workplace discrimination, 3 recommendations for future action by human resources managers were proposed: education, external accountability, and formalized policies and procedures. The findings and recommendations can bridge the gap between small-to-medium enterprise human resource practices and efficacious enterprise risk-management strategies. A diverse workforce can catalyze innovation, increase organizational effectiveness, and thus benefit employers and employees. Communities may benefit by experiencing a culturally representative work environment and lower unemployment for underrepresented populations.

The purpose of this quantitative, non-experimental, retrospective research study was to examine the charges of disability-related, private-sector workplace discrimination made by individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs) to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). To date, there has been a lack of research regarding the nature, scope and dynamics of employment discrimination affecting individuals with ASDs.A portion of the EEOC's Integrated Mission Systems (IMS) database was analyzed, drawing upon the following five major categories: (1) charging-party demographics, (2) responding-party characteristics, (3), U.S. region, (4) ADA Title I discrimination charge categories, and (e) case resolutions. All charges that were received, investigated, and fully resolved by the EEOC from July 26, 1992 (the first date the ADA went in effect through September 30, 2003 (last day of fiscal year 2003), were available for analyses.First, an exploratory descriptive design was employed, in order to capture the characteristics (or profile) of the ADA Title I charges of discrimination made to the EEOC by individuals with ASDs.The second phase of the study, comparative in nature, contrasted the ASD profile against three groups of individuals with other types of disabilities: (1) other physical, sensory, and neurological disabilities, (2) emotional or psychological disabilities, and (3) mental retardation. Overall, the use of Fisher's exact tests and t-Tests for independent groups revealed that the profile of ASD charges has relatively more in common with the charge profile for mental retardation than the other two comparative groups.The third phase of this study, predictive in nature, explored whether or not the final EEOC case resolutions of ASD charges (considered simply as merit vs. non-merit resolutions) could be predicted as a function of some of the contextual variables available within the database. Logistic regression analysis revealed that ASD case resolutions can be partially predicated as a function of: (1) the employer's industry (i.e., Service industries vs. all other industries), and (2) the size of the employer.

No description available.

Legislation, court decisions, and the changing political and social climate provide evidence of the importance of the outcomes of EEO litigation involving challenged selection procedures for transfer, training and development, and promotion. These selection procedures are being challenged by more informed employees and, in many cases, result in costly litigation. Thus, organizations must be aware of the continuing developments in employment law especially as found in court decisions and related legislation. This study investigates judicial and EEOC decisions in discrimination cases to provide answers to these questions: Are organizations aware of the outcomes of EEO litigation involving challenged selection procedures for transfer, training and development, and promotion? Are organizations aware of what constitutes a discriminatory practice in the selection of employees for transfer, training and development, and promotion? Does management recognize and follow nondiscriminatory procedures in selecting personnel for transfer, training and development, and promotion? The purposes of the study are 1. To analyze outcomes of EEO litigation involving challenged selection procedures for transfer, training and development, and promotion; 2. To develop a model set of guidelines to aid organizations in developing nondiscriminatory procedures for use in selecting employees for transfer, training and development, and promotion. This study concludes that many employers are aware of the outcomes of EEO litigation involving challenged selection procedures for transfer, training and development, and promotion. Many employers are also aware of what constitutes a discriminatory practice in the selection of employees for some employment advantage. However, management does not always recognize and follow nondiscriminatory procedures when selecting employees for transfer, training and development, and promotion. The number of cases in which selection procedures were found discriminatory supports this conclusion.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether application forms used in Texas public schools for teachers and administrators were in compliance with federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Texas Human Rights Commission Act (THRCA) regulations regarding preemployment practices. Participating in the study were 740 public school districts in Texas. The study also attempted to determine if these application forms are in violation of EEOC regulations pertaining to pre-employment practices and whether classification based on the districts' size, wealth, student ethnicity and geographical location has a bearing on the degree of compliance with and awareness of EEOC and THRCA regulations. A model employment application form and set of guidelines were developed for school districts to use in securing pre-employment information. Inferential statistics were used through various applicable designs. Three different types of analysis were utilized. These were a Descriptive Analysis, a Goodman- Kruskal Gamma (y) Coefficient—chi-square analysis and a Multiple Regression analysis. The descriptive analysis included the calculation of percentages of the suspect questions appearing on teacher and administrator application forms utilizing the Criteria Used to Determine EEO Compliance and Awareness Among Texas School Districts. The Goodman-Kruskal Gamma (y) Coefficient and the chi-square analysis were employed in order to determine differences in compliance and awareness based on the districts' size, wealth, student ethnicity and geographical location. The GAMTAU. ASC Computer Program was used to test the Gamma values, with a standard z-score. The Multiple Regression analysis was employed to determine to what extent variation in the use of total suspect questions correlated with size, wealth, ethnicity and geographical location. The results of the data analyzed reveal that the size and ethnicity of the school district had a weak but significant correlation with EEO compliance and awareness based on employment application forms for teachers and administrators and that school districts in Texas were not in compliance with EEOC and THRCA regulations regarding application form pre-employment practices.

This phenomenological study explored Black male law enforcement officers’ perspectives of how racial profiling shaped their decisions to explore and commit to a law enforcement career. Criterion and snow ball sampling was used to obtain the 17 participants for this study. Super’s (1990) archway model was used as the theoretical framework. The archway model “is designed to bring out the segmented but unified and developmental nature of career development, to highlight the segments, and to make their origin clear” (Super, 1990, p. 201). Interview data were analyzed using inductive, deductive, and comparative analyses. Three themes emerged from the inductive analysis of the data: (a) color and/or race does matter, (b) putting on the badge, and (c) too black to be blue and too blue to be black. The deductive analysis used a priori coding that was based on Super’s (1990) archway model. The deductive analysis revealed the participants’ career exploration was influenced by their knowledge of racial profiling and how others view them. The comparative analysis between the inductive themes and deductive findings found the theme “color and/or race does matter” was present in the relationships between and within all segments of Super’s (1990) model. The comparative analysis also revealed an expanded notion of self-concept for Black males – marginalized and/or oppressed individuals. Self-concepts, “such as self-efficacy, self-esteem, and role self-concepts, being combinations of traits ascribed to oneself” (Super, 1990, p. 202) do not completely address the self-concept of marginalized and/or oppressed individuals. The self-concept of marginalized and/or oppressed individuals is self-efficacy, self-esteem, traits ascribed to oneself expanded by their awareness of how others view them. (DuBois, 1995; Freire, 1970; Sheared, 1990; Super, 1990; Young, 1990). Ultimately, self-concept is utilized to make career and life decisions. Current human resource policies and practices do not take into consideration that negative police contact could be the result of racial profiling. Current human resource hiring guidelines penalize individuals who have had negative police contact. Therefore, racial profiling is a discriminatory act that can effectively circumvent U.S. Equal Employment Opportunities Commission laws and serve as a boundary mechanism to employment (Rocco & Gallagher, 2004).