- Topics
- Links
Topic: Federal Sexual Harassment Training
A Weighty Issue in Discrimination
Posted by Shanti Atkins
A dramatic rise in fuel prices over the past year has prompted the airlines to revisit the possibility of weight-based ticket pricing. And there’s been no lack of debate on both sides of this heated argument. Does the practice constitute discrimination?
Think about it. An airline is, after all, considered a public service provider that can’t, or at least shouldn’t, discriminate against passengers because of age, race, gender, or even pregnancy. How can it be okay, then, to discriminate because of weight?
At the same time, proponents of this new practice argue that it’s unfair to ask their customers to be inconvenienced by overweight passengers taking up more than their fair share of space. And, thinner, “healthier” passengers don’t feel they should have to pay higher ticket prices when they’re not contributing to this hefty problem.
Does this debate sound familiar? It should, because it’s one your employees are probably having when it comes to other “weighty issues” like rising health insurance costs. Especially with the rise of corporate Wellness Programs.
What The Movies Teach Us About Harassment Training
Posted by Shanti Atkins
Ahhhh… The movies. Whether you’re in the comfort of your home or at the theater, there’s so much to see, and a lot to ponder.
Like what makes certain flicks, like Borat: Cultural Learnings of America For Make Benefit Glorious Nations of Kazakhstan, so successful, even when they’re seemingly “fringe” or in-your-face offensive. Their model for success? Take every stereotype and politically inappropriate scenario you can dream up, push it one step further, and call it entertainment.
A lot of people see these movies as baseless vehicles for tasteless humor- pandering to the lowest common denominator. But others have a different point of view that leans in the direction of intellectual satire. If you take it to the extreme and put our most shameful behaviors right in the viewer’s face, you force them to confront humanity’s dirty laundry and potentially start a meaningful dialogue about prejudice, diversity and why we all seem to be capable of treating each other like crap. And maybe, just maybe, the people who paid $10 for their ticket and another $12.50 on assorted snacks and beverages, will see how preposterous and outlandish racism, sexism and all the other “isms” are.
But when it comes to training your employees about sensitive issues, the Borat approach is a sure-fire recipe for complete disaster.
Do You Know Gina? The Latest Anti-Discrimination Law.
Posted by Shanti Atkins
No, Gina’s not a person – it’s a new law that every HR, legal and ethics professional should know about. GINA stands for the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, and was just passed into law by Congress on May 21, 2008. Sponsors of the bill called it “groundbreaking” and lauded it as a critical civil rights bill.
GINA is designed to balance the benefits of obtaining and using genetic information for things like research and managing personal health and wellness, with the harm that results when employers and health insurance companies misuse the sensitive data.
How Much Do We Tolerate Discrimination? New Study Provides Eye-Opening Insights
Posted by Shanti Atkins
No two people are alike – and that holds true for our prejudices. But there are some interesting trends that have found certain prejudices expressed more clearly among defined gender and ethnic groups.
Several studies have found that men are more tolerant of discrimination than women, but a study released this month goes one step further to find that both genders tend to more readily accept prejudice against some immigrants and Arab-Americans.
The study also found that:
- Men and women differed the least in regard to discriminating against Arab-American airplane passengers, and most in regard to African-American motorists.
- The highest percentage of respondents accepted discrimination against “poorly educated immigrants,” followed second by acceptance of discrimination against Arab-Americans.
- Respondents were least likely to accept discrimination against the genetically disadvantaged, or people who are genetically at high risk for diseases that require expensive medical care.
- Men were 19.6 percent more likely than women to tolerate discrimination against obese people and 17.4 percent more likely to accept racial profiling.
The results, just released this month, come from surveys of more than 3,300 people conducted in 2002 by University of Southern California researchers.
It appears as though implicit bias (often subconscious) is driving the bulk of the problem. Edward J. McCaffery, a USC law professor, who co-authored the study, concludes that an individual who sees nothing wrong with certain kinds of biases will often find others objectionable.
ELT’s Top Five New Year’s Resolutions
Posted by Shanti Atkins
It’s that time of year again – when we vow to make a difference and start the New Year off on the right foot. When it comes to personal resolutions, some of us have decided not to make them. I know some of my “good ideas” at the start of the year quickly turn into “what was I thinking? …” Like the year I tried to go cold turkey on not purchasing new (non-essential) consumer goods for a couple months – a challenge that proved extremely difficult and virtually impossible.
When it comes to the workplace though, making a couple of solid resolutions is a very good idea. The process of selecting your top initiatives and then working out a plan to achieve them can help you focus your time and attention on what really matters.
So … for those of us in the compliance training world, and those of us who manage employment law risks, what should be on the list? At ELT, we’ve boiled it down to 5 simple items.
Red Cross Romance Debacle Underscores Importance of Sexual Harassment Training
Posted by Shanti Atkins
So who’s the latest executive to get caught with his pants down? Mark Everson of the American Red Cross. After learning that he was romantically involved with a subordinate employee, the Board sought his resignation this week—and it was effective immediately. The official reason? According to theRed Cross’ press release, Everson exercised “poor judgment” that “diminished his ability to lead the organization in the future.” Ouch.
EDNA Prohibits Sexual Orientation Discrimination, But Gender Identity Protections Are Cut
Posted by Shanti Atkins
Based on a recent Gallop Poll, nearly 87-90% of Americans believe that gays and lesbians should have equal rights in terms of job opportunities. While states continue to expand employment law protections (see NGAL Task Force State Map of Non-Discrimination Laws) federal laws still do not expressly prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. There’s also no federal coverage for gender identity, which relates to an employee’s beliefs about whether s/he is male or female. It’s an astonishing gap that puts the U.S. behind the curve on the world stage when it comes to civil rights protections.
But one legislative initiative is putting these issues front and center on the national agenda. It’s called the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The EDNA is not a new initiative. It’s actually bounced around Congress in one form or another since 1974. And it’s been languishing for nearly a decade.
Well – the EDNA is back. And it’s making some real progress. Democrats in the House have made some compromises (and created some rifts in the bill’s supporters, as well as the gay and lesbian community) hoping to get some form of legislation passed. The revised bill, H.R. 3685, was passed by the Education and Labor Committee on October 18, 2007. The big change? The bill no longer includes gender identity. It only prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Some in the house believe it’s the only way to get the ENDA passed. Sure enough, on November 7, 2007, H.R. 3685 was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 235 to 184 (14 members did not vote).
Employment Non-Discrimination Act: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination
Posted by Shanti Atkins
Based on a recent Gallop Poll, nearly 87-90% of Americans believe that gays and lesbians should have equal rights in terms of job opportunities. While states continue to expand employment law protections (see NGAL Task Force State Map of Non-Discrimination Laws) federal laws still do not expressly prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. There’s also no federal coverage for gender identity, which relates to an employee’s beliefs about whether s/he is male or female. It’s an astonishing gap that puts the U.S. behind the curve on the world stage when it comes to civil rights protections.
But one legislative initiative is putting these issues front and center on the national agenda. It’s called the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The EDNA is not a new initiative. It’s actually bounced around Congress in one form or another since 1974. And it’s been languishing for nearly a decade.
EMC In Hot Water Over Bias Claims: Can Harassment Training Make a Difference?
Posted by Shanti Atkins
We’d like to think that childish, boorish and demeaning antics only happen at “those other” companies; the ones with different values, cultures, and an unchecked workforce. But the reality is that every organization has the potential not just for isolated instances of egregious misconduct, but also for more widespread, systemic conduct – the kind of misconduct that creates significant legal risk and can destroy the culture and reputation you’ve worked so hard to build.
Case in point: EMC. Today’s Wall Street Journal piece on the data storage giant is a doozy: A Data-Storage Titan Confronts Bias Claims.
Seventeen former saleswomen filed suit against EMC back in 2004 and they’re now seeking class action status. The plaintiffs are claiming discrimination and harassment – and the allegations are pretty old school, not to mention, a PR disaster – locker room antics, company paid visits to strip clubs, demeaning sexual remarks, and retaliation against women who complained about the hostile atmosphere.
EMC denies the allegations and is fighting the class certification, as well as the lawsuit.
Beyond Sexual Harassment: EEOC Issues Guidance on Family Responsibility Discrimination
Posted by Shanti Atkins
The workplace is a whole lot different than it was just a few decades ago. There are more double income families – not necessarily by choice, but often for survival. More Americans are taking on elder care responsibilities. More men are taking time off to care for children, and using employer policies once “reserved” for females. And without a doubt there are more women (and mothers) in the workforce today.
Along with these shifts, we’ve seen the expression of some powerful negative stereotypes and old-school cultural norms, which tend to butt heads with the needs and realities of the contemporary American workforce.
Not surprisingly, a new employment law trend has emerged – Family Responsibility Discrimination. FRD has found its way into mainstream discrimination discussions, and is an important new topic to cover in discrimination and harassment training. Most significantly, the EEOC issued guidance on FRD in late May of 2007. (See EEOC Guidance on FRD). The EEOC didn’t create a new cause of action or expand existing statues – but its guidance has brought attention and legitimacy to this issue.
