SpeedRacer 1 #1 September 30, 2011 They usually say it's voluntary, and it won't affect your eligibility. So why do they ask it? What do they do with the info? If it's voluntary, is there any reason I should give out that info? Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #2 September 30, 2011 QuoteThey usually say it's voluntary, and it won't affect your eligibility. So why do they ask it? What do they do with the info? If it's voluntary, is there any reason I should give out that info? Related to another thread, but take a look at this typical application from a typical company. Make certain your read page 3. http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com/documents/bn_employment_application_february_2011.pdf Anyway, that's one reason, they get tax incentives depending on what category you fall under. Also see; http://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/PDF/WOTC_Fact_Sheet.pdfquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #3 September 30, 2011 Human Resources, or Employee Relations uses that data to deflect any suits against the company for discrimination either by employees or customers. Additionally, the data is reported to the Dept of Labor ( if the co. is big enough) to comply with Equal Employment dictates from the government. Just a few of the ways corporations screw their workers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #4 October 1, 2011 Quote Human Resources, or Employee Relations uses that data to deflect any suits against the company for discrimination either by employees or customers. Additionally, the data is reported to the Dept of Labor ( if the co. is big enough) to comply with Equal Employment dictates from the government. Just a few of the ways corporations screw their workers. So, the corporation collects employee demographic data to monitor and ensure their compliance with the dictates of the EEOC and DOL and to protect themselves from exposure to lawsuits that may be related to any non-compliance ....and you consider that to be a "way" that the corporation is screwing the employee? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
460 0 #5 October 1, 2011 What if I claim I'm black but "look" white? I could claim it was a mistake on the form or I could claim someone crap about genetics and traits.Looks like a death sandwich without the bread - Steve Deadman Morrell, BASE 174 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #6 October 1, 2011 OK, just did a little reading on this. Some sources say that the ethnicity questions are stripped from the job application, and are just used to assess the company's overall recruiting demographics. So they wouldn't tie your answer to your resume, and make hiring decisions based on it. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #7 October 1, 2011 Demographic data also includes geography, population density...etc. An allegation of non compliance usually follows some act that appears to be unfair or biased. This discussion was about ethnicity. If a corporation is alleged to be in non compliance, or in any litigation having anything to do with employees, if you think they won't use that data first to defend their position and to bolster their position as non-biased, you are indeed mistaken. If you also believe that the data will not be used in employee contract negotiations, then you are again very, very mistaken. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #8 October 1, 2011 QuoteWhat if I claim I'm black but "look" white? I could claim it was a mistake on the form or I could claim someone crap about genetics and traits. I suppose applicants could claim whatever they want on the application. It's just "data" that the corporation uses to ensure compliance and passes along to the feds as is required by federal regulations. If the applicant is lying on the form then that could be one of the "ways" the worker would be "screwing" the corporation ...unless the applicant really doesn't fit into a specific demographic group, thereby exposing the ridiculosity of the reporting mandate to begin with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #9 October 1, 2011 Quote Demographic data also includes geography, population density...etc. An allegation of non compliance usually follows some act that appears to be unfair or biased. This discussion was about ethnicity. If a corporation is alleged to be in non compliance, or in any litigation having anything to do with employees, if you think they won't use that data first to defend their position and to bolster their position as non-biased, you are indeed mistaken. If you also believe that the data will not be used in employee contract negotiations, then you are again very, very mistaken. Of course they will use that data to defend themselves. It's the same data the company used to ensure compliance in the first place. Of course the data will be used in negotiations. The rules of employment, with regard to an applicant's/worker's demographic profile, have been set by the gov't. ...not the corporation. By saying that a corporation uses the data to "screw the worker", you are assuming that the corporation is knowingly and purposefully attempting to violate the EEOC regs. Nothing wrong with a company presenting evidence of it's compliance in a lawsuit that alleges non-compliance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #10 October 1, 2011 QuoteOK, just did a little reading on this. Some sources say that the ethnicity questions are stripped from the job application, and are just used to assess the company's overall recruiting demographics. So they wouldn't tie your answer to your resume, and make hiring decisions based on it. Do you honestly believe in this age of Facebook any employer can't tell what ethnicity a candidate is. Oh dear, that's almost charmingly innocent.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #11 October 1, 2011 "The rules of employment, with regard to an applicant's/worker's demographic profile, have been set by the gov't." Whuuuu...? Sorry.......... Nonsense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #12 October 1, 2011 QuoteQuoteOK, just did a little reading on this. Some sources say that the ethnicity questions are stripped from the job application, and are just used to assess the company's overall recruiting demographics. So they wouldn't tie your answer to your resume, and make hiring decisions based on it. Do you honestly believe in this age of Facebook any employer can't tell what ethnicity a candidate is. Oh dear, that's almost charmingly innocent. ..not to mention that at some point in the process there will likely be actual interview. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #13 October 1, 2011 Quote "The rules of employment, with regard to an applicant's/worker's demographic profile, have been set by the gov't." Whuuuu...? Sorry.......... Nonsense. 'Splain please. Maybe I should have said "The rules of hiring, with regard...." ? Edit to add from your post #3 -- "Additionally, the data is reported to the Dept of Labor ( if the co. is big enough) to comply with Equal Employment dictates from the government." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #14 October 1, 2011 Please see post #10. Mr. Quade is on point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #15 October 1, 2011 Quote Please see post #10. Mr. Quade is on point. a) What does Quade's post #10 have to do with your allegation in post #3 (which is what I responded to in the first place)? b) Why do you assume that corporations are collecting job application/hiring data for the purpose of "screwing" future employees and not for keeping track of their compliance with federal EEOC regulations (as much for their own records as for reporting to bureaucrats)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #16 October 1, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteOK, just did a little reading on this. Some sources say that the ethnicity questions are stripped from the job application, and are just used to assess the company's overall recruiting demographics. So they wouldn't tie your answer to your resume, and make hiring decisions based on it. Do you honestly believe in this age of Facebook any employer can't tell what ethnicity a candidate is. Oh dear, that's almost charmingly innocent. ..not to mention that at some point in the process there will likely be actual interview. Oh, but in the age of Facebook, employers can and do check out candidates before the interview so now it's even easier to discriminate. No need to schedule face-to-face contact and risk a potentially illegal employment questions when FB gives up the answers for free.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #17 October 1, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteOK, just did a little reading on this. Some sources say that the ethnicity questions are stripped from the job application, and are just used to assess the company's overall recruiting demographics. So they wouldn't tie your answer to your resume, and make hiring decisions based on it. Do you honestly believe in this age of Facebook any employer can't tell what ethnicity a candidate is. Oh dear, that's almost charmingly innocent. ..not to mention that at some point in the process there will likely be actual interview. Oh, but in the age of Facebook, employers can and do check out candidates before the interview so now it's even easier to discriminate. No need to schedule face-to-face contact and risk a potentially illegal employment questions when FB gives up the answers for free. Well sure ...racism and other forms of discrimination do exist but in the end the company still must comply with the EEOC rules and regs or risk a complaint/lawsuit from an employee or applicant. I'm only saying that it is not "screwing" a worker to provide data that is collected in the hiring process as defensive evidence in a lawsuit. The judge will decide whether the worker was screwed or not after both sides have presented their cases. Claiming in a lawsuit that a corporation discriminated against someone based on his facebook page might be a little hard to prove in court. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #18 October 1, 2011 QuoteClaiming in a lawsuit that a corporation discriminated against someone based on his facebook page might be a little hard to prove in court. Which is why it's the "perfect" crime.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #19 October 1, 2011 QuoteQuoteClaiming in a lawsuit that a corporation discriminated against someone based on his facebook page might be a little hard to prove in court. Which is why it's the "perfect" crime. ...which is why folks should be really careful with their online presence and what they reveal about themselves on facebook, etc. and in forums like this. For example, if I was still in my younger years and still building a career, I wouldn't be posting half the stuff I do in SC. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #20 October 1, 2011 To focus narrowly, as you are doing, is to miss the greater view. Nit picking deflects the conversation to a different direction. Labor laws, broadly, not all, are geared to protect companies from labor organizations. Ethnicity has no value in the work place, except to be used as a tool by corporations, as a defense, after a complaint of bias has occurred. EEO compliance is a non starter. Unless a complaint has been lodged, or the corporation is under judicial orders, or employee contract talks are underway, then, does the "ethnic balance" data become useful. That is how employees, and the consumer get screwed. Happens every day. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #21 October 1, 2011 QuoteOK, just did a little reading on this. Some sources say that the ethnicity questions are stripped from the job application, and are just used to assess the company's overall recruiting demographics. So they wouldn't tie your answer to your resume, and make hiring decisions based on it. That's the standard claim; but call me skeptical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,121 #22 October 1, 2011 Yeah, I'd be skeptical in some cases, not in others. Depends on the organization. Interestingly enough, at one company I worked for, when an Anglo woman married someone with an Hispanic name, and took his name, they were generally encouraged to reclassify themselves as Hispanic for EEO purposes . Equal employment is about trying to reflect the demographics of the available labor pool, even if the people don't look or talk like you. The guy who gives preference to Aggies (we used to have one of those, too)? He's just as guilty of prejudice as the guy who doesn't like to hire Vietnamese. Wendy P. There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #23 October 1, 2011 Quote To focus narrowly, as you are doing, is to miss the greater view. Nit picking deflects the conversation to a different direction. Labor laws, broadly, not all, are geared to protect companies from labor organizations. Ethnicity has no value in the work place, except to be used as a tool by corporations, as a defense, after a complaint of bias has occurred. EEO compliance is a non starter. Unless a complaint has been lodged, or the corporation is under judicial orders, or employee contract talks are underway, then, does the "ethnic balance" data become useful. That is how employees, and the consumer get screwed. Happens every day. Wow! I suppose there are a couple of different directions I could go with a response to this. But, I'll go with this one - My "narrowly focused" post was in response to your equally narrowly focused analysis of the reasons that corporations collect this data. In post #3 you allude to the possibility that corporations that may (inadvertently or purposefully) commit a discriminatory act could/would use the collected data to build a legal defense ...and then imply that the data was collected specifically for that purpose even though you also say that "...the data is reported to the Dept of Labor ( if the co. is big enough) to comply with Equal Employment dictates from the government". You "narrowly" conclude that this is one "...of the ways corporations screw their workers". I don't believe it is unreasonable to expect that the data would likely be used as evidence in court. Then, in post #20 you just about accuse "big corporation", in cahoots with DOL and EEOC, of intentionally crafting labor laws to protect themselves from unions while disguising those laws as anti-discriminatory and pro-worker. And you imply that it is the intent of the corporations to find a way to screw their workers by circumventing agreements with unions. Here you have made your agenda clear. The feds, by creating anti-discriminatory labor regulations through EEOC, have inadvertently usurped a lot of the power that had previously been wielded only by the unions. Now the unions can not express opposition to these regulations (which, in reality, are "geared to protect companies from labor organizations") and still pretend to be pro-worker. The only way to reconcile the mumbo-jumbo in your post #20 is to declare that these labor regulations were designed to be anti-union by some vast corporate-government conspiracy and that a corporation, having committed the original sin of being a corporation, must be guilty of discrimination if an allegation has been made. No need to use federally required data for defense of that allegation because it is collected by the company for the purpose of pre-emptively providing that defense. Only in leftyland! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #24 October 1, 2011 You guys have lost me now. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #25 October 1, 2011 Quote You guys have lost me now. Me: Corporations sometimes bad, sometimes good - we'll sort it out in court. Boogey: Corporations always bad. Unions always good. Workers screwed either way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites