aka adverse impact, discrimination that occurs when an employment practice results in members of a protected class being treated less favorable than members of a non-protected class even though discrimination was not intentional (consequences)
a guideline generally accepted by the courts and the EEOC for making a prima facie case of disparate impact by showing that an employment practice results in members of a protected class being treated less favorable by an employment practice than members of a non-protected class.
EEOC. agency responsible for enforcing compliance with antidiscrimination laws such as the civil rights act of 1994, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Americans with disabilities act.
a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. Ex: breathing, walking, eating,
the employment practice that has some relationship to legitimate business goals and that it is essential to the company's survival. you claim that a protected class is this so you can keep using it.
based off E.O. 11246. does not give preference to any group.
First up, let’s take a look at an adverse impact definition. What is adverse impact?
Ready to revamp your hiring practice? There are plenty of ways that you can avoid adverse impact discrimination in your workplace.
Learning how to measure diversity and inclusion could make a huge difference to your business. You can use this method to check whether your company is experiencing adverse impact.
Addressing and measuring adverse impact should be an objective that organizations of all shapes and sizes strive toward. In order to minimize adverse impact, you will need to do more than simply recognize that adverse impact exist it has. You will need to make a concerted, ongoing effort to identify it and confront it.
For this question, assume you are employed as an HR consultant for a mid-sized bank. The bank employs 200 tellers across its branches. Review the details of the teller position as provided on O*Net (http://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/43-3071.00).
Part 1 A variety of approaches are available to a HR manger to select a candidate for the job whose job specifications are established. Depending on the needs of the job the HR manger may develop a se view the full answer
Adverse impact is generally the first step considered in a potential selection bias case. If a hiring practice has no adverse impact, it can be considered to be in compliance with hiring procedures. If an adverse impact occurs, it does not automatically mean that there is a problem with the selection process. You would have to dig deeper into hiring practices to make that determination.
If in Bob’s case there was an adverse impact, the next step would be for him to be sure that the selection procedures being used are based on job-relevant factors. A selection process and procedure that have an adverse impact can be used if its use leads to more effective functioning of the firm or can be shown to be a business necessity. This means that the element of the selection procedure that is causing adverse impact can be directly shown to contribute to hiring individuals who are better able to perform on the job.
Sometimes this means introducing a new selection device, for example, using a psychological test to measure ability rather than relying on the judgment of an interviewer who might have biases, even unintentional ones. Valid skills assessment tests for employment are also tools to be used.
Every firm should try their best to avoid adverse impact through the use of sound HR selection practices. If it occurs, however, be prepared to defend your practices by following these steps. A sound selection system will not only minimize legal problems, but it will enable the hiring of the best people for your organization. It is a sound investment that is well worth making.
The four-fifths rule sets a threshold for adverse impact that the group in question (women for Bob) would have a hiring rate that is at least 4/5 th of the rate for the comparison group (men for Bob). That means Bob could have hired as few as 20% (4/5 th of 25%) of the female applicants and not had an adverse impact.