|
|
|
Printable version  |
|
Many companies believe they are well prepared to prevent discrimination in the workplace. They've established policies, asked employees to read them, trained staff members to be aware of cultural and ethnic diversity, and encouraged the reporting of incidents.
They’ve done all they can to meet Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits job bias on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Or have they?
|
A Balancing Act Perception can play a large role in racial discrimination cases.
Take a case involving Supercuts, the national chain of hair salons. A former regional manager, Richard Quick, claimed he was fired for refusing to take part in a new company policy designed to “balance the platform” by reducing the number of African American employees working for the company.
The EEOC also charged that Supercuts failed to hire and promote African Americans and terminated them due to their race.
Supercuts denied having any such policy, but agreed to pay $3.2 million to settle the claims in 2003.
 The lesson: Be aware that a radical shift in the ethnic makeup of your workforce could support claims of racial discrimination, even if no discrimination took place. |
The problem is, many people assume race and color are synonymous and the law applies only to discrimination between different races or ethnic groups. As a result, color bias has often gone unreported. But that’s changing rapidly.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which enforces the Civil Rights Act, says color-bias complaints have soared since the mid-1990s and represent a "potential emerging" trend in workplace discrimination trends.
Under federal law, discriminating against people based on the shade of their skin is distinct from — but just as illegal as — racial discrimination. Color discrimination doesn't necessarily involve racial bias. For example, whites can be guilty of color discrimination (but not racial discrimination) if they favor hiring light-skinned black applicants over dark-skinned blacks.
However, the EEOC says a significant number of color-bias complaints involve intra-race allegations. Two recent cases highlight the problem:
Dwight Burch, a former employee of the Applebee’s restaurant chain, filed discrimination charges alleging that a light-skinned African American manager discriminated against him because of his dark skin color. Burch charged that the manager fired him when he threatened to report harassing remarks to Applebee’s headquarters office.
The EEOC investigated and filed suit in U.S. District Court in Atlanta after attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement with the company.
Applebee's settled the case in 2003 and agreed to give Mr. Burch $40,000 for lost pay and emotional distress, while it denied liability or wrongdoing. The company also agreed to:
 Conduct anti-discrimination training.
Report to the EEOC all color-harassment claims made in the next 18 months by employees at any of the chain's Georgia restaurants.
To include color discrimination in its written harassment and discrimination policies.
In the second case, the EEOC sued a Mexican restaurant in San Antonio on behalf of a white supervisor, who claimed he was forced to discriminate on the basis of color. The agency charged that the restaurant's Mexican-American owner told the supervisor not to allow 'dark-skinned' Hispanics to work in the dining room. The employee quit and complained to the EEOC. The restaurant was ordered to pay $100,000 in fines in 2002.
To make your anti-discrimination policy is as comprehensive as possible, make sure your policy clearly states that bias based on color, as well as race, will not be tolerated. When classifying discrimination cases, the EEOC considers the races of the parties involved and the nature of allegedly derogatory comments.
This article is provided as a service by: L.S. Sherman Litigation Consulting.
LSSLC is a group of complex litigation specialists helping attorneys prepare successful complex litigation through the management of detailed technical information and engagement of experienced testifying experts of unsurpassed quality.
Contact Linda Sherman: 610-642-7755 |
|
|
|
 |
|
LSSLC, LLC provides the information in this newsletter for general guidance only, and does not constitute the provision of legal advice or professional consulting of any kind. The information provided herein should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional tax, accounting, legal, or other competent advisers. Before making any decision or taking any action, you should consult a professional adviser who has been provided with all pertinent facts relevant to your particular situation.
The information is provided "as is," with no assurance or guarantee of completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the information, and without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to warranties of performance, merchantability, and fitness for a particular purpose.
|
|
|
Full Newsletter
