Google

Hiring discrimination occurs when an employer makes a decision based on an applicant's membership in a particular group rather than on their individual abilities and qualifications. This practice is considered discriminatory unless belonging to that specific group is a direct and essential requirement for performing the job.

Hiring Discrimination

To prevent discrimination, U.S. law prohibits employers from asking certain questions during interviews. These restrictions cover direct inquiries about an applicant's age, marital status, U.S. citizenship, disabilities, race, or religion. Additionally, employers cannot ask indirect questions that might reveal this protected information, such as asking about a person's birthplace or with whom they live.

Illegal Interview Questions

Visual representations can illustrate groups that are legally protected from hiring discrimination. For instance, a pregnant woman represents protection against sex-based discrimination. Symbols of different faiths, such as the Christian cross, the Jewish Star of David, and the Islamic crescent, exemplify protection based on religion. An older person using a cane can represent protected characteristics of both age and disability.

Examples of Protected Groups in Hiring

A restaurant is hiring a new head chef. The hiring manager reviews four finalists. Which of the following decisions is the clearest example of hiring discrimination?

A company is making a final hiring decision for a customer service representative role. Which of the following actions by the hiring manager is the clearest example of hiring discrimination?

In the United States, a framework of city, state, and federal laws exists to combat hiring discrimination. These legal protections are designed to prevent employers from making hiring decisions based on an applicant's membership in a protected group rather than their individual qualifications.

Federal Legislation Prohibiting Employment Discrimination

In a 2001–2002 correspondence experiment, Bertrand and Mullainathan sent 4,870 fictitious résumés to selected newspaper job ads in Boston and Chicago, randomly assigning White-sounding or African-American-sounding names. Interview callback rates were 9.65% and 6.45%, respectively: a 3.20 percentage-point gap, approximately 50% relative to 6.45%. Randomization supports attributing the sampled contrast to assigned name signals; actual applicants’ racial identities were not manipulated. The outcome was a callback—not a completed interview, job offer, hiring, or earnings. Selected ads, occupational categories, cities, and period limit generalization; no current nationwide rate is established.

Source: https://sendhil.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Publication-52.pdf

Learn Before

Related