Category: Discrimination

How Are Deaf Applicants Discriminated Against by Employers?

By ,

deaf discrimination employers

When a person who is deaf looks for a job, they may encounter employment discrimination. Discrimination may be done overtly or subtly by prospective employers. Often, discrimination occurs due to prejudices or because the employer does not fully understand deafness and hearing loss. For example, an employer may mistakenly think that a deaf employee will need an interpreter all the time.

Some deaf applicants will omit their disability on their resume. People who are deaf or have hearing loss often utilize a personal relay phone number on their resume. Employers would not know that the applicant is deaf or hard of hearing until they call the phone number.

If you feel that you have been discriminated against because you are deaf or have hearing loss, then the best course of action is to document everything. Proper documentation is paramount to winning a potential legal battle. For example, if you utilize a relay phone call to your potential employer and they state that they do not hire people who are disabled, document the incident.

What Should I Do if I Experienced Discrimination Due to My Disability?

If you have experienced discrimination while applying for a job, it could be a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA states that a job applicant is considered qualified if the person can do the necessary functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodations. One reasonable accommodation may include an interpreter for important staff meetings.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is responsible for protecting your rights in the job search, along with your rights while you are employed. While you may want to file a discrimination lawsuit immediately, the EEOC mandates that you have to file a complaint before you can file a lawsuit. You have 180 days to file from the day the discrimination happened, including holidays and weekends.

Filing With the EEOC

There are three different methods that you can file an employment discrimination complaint with the EEOC. You can do so in person, by phone, or through the mail. If you choose to do so in person, then go to an EEOC field office. Since each office has its own procedures, the EEOC states that you should contact the field office in advance. To start a charge of discrimination by phone, you can call the EEOC and provide them your information, but you still must file the charge.

To file by mail, you can mail the EEOC a signed letter that has all the details. The EEOC may contact you for more information, or the EEOC may put all the information you sent on an official charge form and ask for your signature. You may consult and hire a lawyer to represent you through the EEOC process, which can be very helpful.

Mediation and Investigation

The EEOC could ask you to go through mediation. If that fails, a charge of discrimination will go to an investigator. When the EEOC investigator decides that there are grounds for a discrimination case, they will try to settle with the employer. If a settlement is not achieved, the EEOC will decide whether to file a lawsuit against the employer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Workers Who Have Experienced Deaf Discrimination

Being deaf should not put you in a position where you are not qualified for employment. Our Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can listen to your discrimination case and advise you on how to proceed. Call us at 215-574-0600 or complete our online form for an initial consultation. We are located in Philadelphia, and we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination, Employment
  Comments: Comments Off on How Are Deaf Applicants Discriminated Against by Employers?
  Other posts by

How can I Avoid Legal Issues When Firing Employees?

By ,

Philadelphia Business Lawyers

An employer cannot terminate a worker for unjust reasons. That type of termination is unlawful, and some examples of wrongful termination include:

  • Whistleblowing.
  • Complaints about violations of employee rights.
  • Testifying against the company or another employee in legal suits.
  • Participating in lawful union activities.
  • Filing claims for Workers’ Compensation or charges of unfair labor practices.
  • Wage garnishments in order to pay debts.

Employers cannot fire an employee in a manner that violates federal or state laws. As an employer, understanding both state and federal laws regarding employee termination will help you avoid a wrongful termination suit. Anyone in your company who is in a position to make termination decisions should have an idea of state and federal laws so they can avoid firing someone in an unjust manner.

For example you cannot fire an employee through retaliation, and you cannot violate state and federal discrimination laws, employment agreements, and you must be in accordance with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

When can I Fire an Employee?

You can fire an employee for numerous reasons, and some of the most common include:

  • Incompetence
  • Repeated unexcused absences or tardiness
  • Sexual harassment
  • Verbal abuse
  • Physical violence
  • Falsification of records
  • Theft

It is important to note that an employer has the right to fire an employee for any legal reason. At-will employment laws differ from state to state, however, the laws are usually similar.

Keep Employee Performance Documents

Running a business involves many decisions, and those include hiring and firing employees. Often, these decisions are made due to performance issues, and a great way to minimize legal issues is to document how that employee performs.

Documentation should provide detailed information of incidents and any employee write-ups for disciplinary issues. Also, customer complaints and time cards can help give you the credence that you need when it comes to justifiably firing an employee.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Advocate for Employers Fending Off a Wrongful Termination Suit

When you own a company, the prospect that you will one day have a disgruntled employee is high. In this case, you will need our skilled Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. to help you build a case. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

How can Work-From-Home Employees be Protected Against Discrimination?

By ,

Employee working from home

Now that many COVID-19 restrictions have eased, many employees are back to work in the office. However, some personnel remain reluctant to do so for a litany of reasons. In the next few years, it is predicted that a plethora of discrimination claims will be filed by employees who feel they have been neglected for promotion due to working remotely.

There are various reasons why personnel want to work remotely. The ability to work remotely has benefited some employees, specifically older workers, those who have disabilities, and women who are pregnant and have childcare responsibilities. However, some employees may feel that they are discriminated against because they are working from home.

Indirect discrimination occurs when a provision, criterion, or exercise puts a collection of employees who share a common trait at an unjust disadvantage. Therefore, if employers promote or provide more opportunities to office-based employees, there is a threat of discrimination claims filed by remote workers.

What are the Rights of Remote Employees?

Work-from-home employees are permitted certain rights. Their employer should provide guidelines and procedures for remote work. It is essential that companies outline rules around who is eligible to work at home and within the office, along with what is expected of them.

Remote employees should be able to utilize technology within reason. In certain conditions, an employee should be able to use their laptop, an additional monitor, headset, or another type of device as long as it is for work and it is approved. Also, businesses should allow employees a choice to use a personal or company-owned laptop.

Employees obtain training in order to be able to do their work. Companies should still provide ongoing training to employees. Remote workers are often at a disadvantage of being ignored by their employers when it comes to receiving proper feedback and guidance. At-home workers should also be afforded suitable and effective technical support, and they might be given a stipend to purchase needed items if necessary.

Our Philadelphia Employment Law Attorneys at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Protect the Rights of Work-From-Home Employees

Regardless of whether you work from home or in the office, you have rights, and you should understand them. If you believe that you have been passed over for a promotion or another job-related opportunity because you work from home, our skilled employment law attorneys in Philadelphia can help. For more information and to schedule an initial consultation, contact us online or call us at 215-574-0600. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on How can Work-From-Home Employees be Protected Against Discrimination?
  Other posts by

National Coffeehouse Chain Reaches Settlement Over Racial Bias in Promotions

By ,

Coffeehouse Racial Bias

In March 2021, Starbucks entered into a voluntary agreement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) over accusations of racial bias in the promotion of employees. While there were no singular cases or incidents pointing to this accusation, the company did submit a new plan for promoting internally. The standardized methods will mandate managers to follow company procedures in the hiring of new employees and the promotion of existing ones. Workers must apply to open positions, internally or externally, to be considered for roles.

Starbucks has been embroiled in race-related controversy before. In 2020, employees raised concerns over censorship of allowed messages with their uniform. The corporation has acknowledged past failures and claims they will strive to do better, including the revision of hiring practices to promote company-wide diversity.

What can Constitute as Bias in Hiring and Employment?

Federal law says employers are not allowed to discriminate against employees or job applicants based on:

  • Race
  • Color
  • Religion
  • Gender or gender identity
  • Sexual orientation
  • Pregnancy status
  • National origin
  • Age
  • Disability

The primary concern in the Starbucks complaint is the implicit bias often linked to informal hiring practices. While some workers will inevitably stand out for superior work performance, oftentimes, offering a new hire or moving an existing employee up the ladder can require a judgement call.

To mitigate this implicit bias, Starbucks has taken away much of that autonomy and will now regulate and track application data and promotional opportunities, establish new training and interview guides for hiring managers, who will be encouraged to make merit-based and equity-based decisions in their process. The company does have more diversity at the retail level compared to the corporate level.

How are Bias Allegations Handled?

The EEOC tries to keep current and prospective employees from experiencing bias by offering preventative measures, including educational programs, employer outreach programs, and technical assistance. The commission operates 53 field offices across the United States.

Despite all the resources available and the established laws, there are still instances where job applicants and employed workers feel they are being discriminated. The EEOC will cover most companies with 15 or more employees, 20 or more in the case of age discrimination, along with unions and employment agencies. They handle claims involving:

  • Hiring
  • Firing
  • Promotion
  • Harassment
  • Training
  • Wages
  • Benefits

A worker bringing a claim to the EEOC can expect the commission to investigate the claim fairly and accurately. The commission will make a finding and attempt to resolve if discrimination has occurred. In some cases, the EEOC will file a lawsuit if the issue is not corrected, the actions are particularly egregious, or if there is a wider concern that affects more employees beyond the company in question. To strengthen a claim, a discriminated worker should speak to a lawyer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Workers with Discrimination Cases

Despite state and federal laws, many employees continue to experience discrimination at work. If you need help with your discrimination case, the Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help you get the relief you deserve. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on National Coffeehouse Chain Reaches Settlement Over Racial Bias in Promotions
  Other posts by

Why Do Many Successful Asian Americans Face Workplace Discrimination?

By ,

Asian Americans Workplace Discrimination

Asian Americans are among the best-educated per capita of any racial or ethnic demographic in the United States. That is especially true in the tech industry, where Asian Americans generally do well in finding and holding jobs but are disproportionately overlooked.

Due to Coronavirus (COVID-19) reportedly originating from China, the Asian Americans and Pacific Islander (AAPI) community has been targeted by more than 3,000 hate crimes since the beginning of the pandemic, according to the group Stop AAPI Hate. That is a great rise in hate crimes targeting the AAPI community since the outbreak of the global pandemic. The sudden rise in violence targeting members of the AAPI community outside of the workplace suggests that they also experience frequent discrimination in the workplace.

Studies Affirm Qualified AAPI Candidates Mostly Overlooked

A 2013 study compiled by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) showed it is nearly four times harder for AAPI employees to achieve managerial positions, despite being fully qualified for internal promotions. U.S. citizens identifying as AAPI comprise about 5.6 percent of the nation’s population, but they account for 12 percent of its licensed professionals.

Additionally, AAPI students comprise more than 10 percent of the annual graduation classes at the top 30 law schools across the nation. However, those same graduates have the highest attrition rate and smallest ratio of partners-to-associates when compared to all other racial and ethnic groups.

Making matters worse is the impression that Asian Americans are generally highly successful and do not need governmental programs. The AAPI community consistently is left out of affirmative action hiring and admissions due to the perceived success in both.

Closer scrutiny reveals that AAPI members generally obtain jobs at relatively high rates when compared to other demographics. However, when it comes to long-term success and the ability to earn promotion to leadership levels, opportunities for AAPI members mostly do not exist. The EEOC says that this is a sign of workplace discrimination.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Fight Against Workplace Discrimination

Hate crimes targeting members of the AAPI community are rising rapidly, while advancement opportunities are more difficult to obtain due to discrimination. When discrimination arises in the workplace, our Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help you. For more information and an initial consultation about your case, call us at 215-574-0600 or complete our online form. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on Why Do Many Successful Asian Americans Face Workplace Discrimination?
  Other posts by

Can Employers Incentivize Vaccinations?

By ,

Employers Incentivize Vaccinations

With a national push to get people vaccinated against the Coronavirus (COVID-19), the issue of personal privacy regarding health care is becoming more prominent. That is especially true in states in which vaccination rates are lagging. However, the federal government recently updated guidelines to help clarify workers’ rights to information regarding COVID-19 vaccinations and whether or not they can be fired for not getting vaccinated.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) updated guidelines that affirm employers have a legitimate interest in encouraging all workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19. The need to maintain a safe and healthful workplace generally outweighs individual privacy rights, but medical privacy is especially difficult to overcome.

Rather than deny employers the right to demand vaccination among all workers, the EEOC says employers can encourage workers to obtain vaccinations and share the results. The way in which job providers go about encouraging workers to do so makes a big difference between legal efforts and violating workers’ rights.

Incentives Instead of Coercion

Job providers can encourage workers to obtain vaccinations and share the knowledge of their successful vaccinations with them. The EEOC says workplace incentives are ideal tools for legally encouraging workers to get vaccinated and announce it to coworkers and others. Incentives also are fully legal to encourage virtually all workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Incentives could be financial in nature and generally reward vaccinated workers.

While incentives are acceptable, the EEOC says coercion is strictly prohibited. Incentives essentially enable a worker to choose to participate, whereas coercion forces a worker to participate in violation of federal laws protecting health care privacy.

Coercion essentially tells a worker that unless they get vaccinated, consequences could occur. Those consequences could result in changes in job duties, work hours, or even result in a loss of employment. Coercion instills a sense of fear and could easily trigger a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Vaccination Information Must be Kept Private

When job provides invoke a legal incentives program to encourage workers to become fully vaccinated and share the results, the employer must keep the information private. Although the worker might choose to get vaccinated and share that information with their employer, the employer still has to protect the worker’s private health care information per the ADA.

Many job providers also are offering at-work vaccinations. Many vaccinations require individuals to provide detailed information about their health. That information must be protected, especially if the job provider is the one making it possible for vaccinations to occur while on the job. If a worker feels they are being targeted or discriminated against for not getting vaccinated or because of another issue, they are encouraged to speak to a lawyer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Workers Understand Their Privacy and Health Care Rights

If you are being coerced into obtaining a full vaccination against COVID-19, our experienced Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can protect your rights. Contact us online or call us at 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on Can Employers Incentivize Vaccinations?
  Other posts by

How can Schools Prevent Gender Identity Discrimination?

By ,

Gender Identity Discrimination

Executive Order 13988, Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation, expands upon prohibited forms of discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Fair Housing Act. Additionally, the executive order reestablished the transgender rights policy that was published in 2016 by the Department of Education and the Department of Justice. Educational institutions must not discriminate and treat transgender students any differently.

Executive Order 13988 expands the categories for prohibited sex discrimination, including gender identity, expression, and sexual orientation discrimination. It states that children should have the ability to learn in school without having to worry if they will not be allowed to use locker rooms or restrooms or be allowed to play on school sports teams.

The protections also apply to school administrators and staff. The order also states that adults should not have to fear being mistreated, demoted, or fired for not conforming to sex-based stereotypes. Every person is entitled to equal treatment under the law, and this should not be any different based on their gender identity or sexual orientation. Educational institutions and school district leaders must frequently review their policies and procedures to make sure that the rights of transgender students and employees are being protected.

To prohibit any type of discrimination, the first step would be to review anti-discrimination and harassment policies. Schools need to ensure that their locker room and restroom access policies provide the same access for all students and employees consistent with gender identity. Anti-harassment and discrimination training programs also need to be enforced.

How Do I Report a Title IX Violation?

All members of educational communities have to comply with Title IX regulations and Executive Order 13988, from students to faculty to administrators. Anyone who witnesses or is otherwise impacted by behaviors or events that could be construed or perceived as sexual or gender harassment, discrimination, assault or misconduct is required to report it.

Institutions and school districts should have their own procedures for reporting Title IX violations, with steps for reporting and resolving the complaints. Having a supportive process that allows people to report discrimination and be treated fairly is essential, and this fair treatment also applies to those who are accused to protect their rights. Complaints and the accused can both be individuals or groups. Internal investigations of the allegations are required by law and must be conducted in a timely, thorough manner.

Designating a staff member, such as the head of the Human Resources (HR) Department, to serve as the institution’s Title IX coordinator is helpful. A coordinator can help ensure consistency for reporting procedures and investigations. This person can work with other staff members to monitor the environment for any situations that could be viewed as discriminatory.

Other staff members can be involved by joining committees organized to set up anti-discrimination and harassment training, to design new, inclusive programs, and to conduct follow-through on complaints of alleged discrimination. Groups can also be organized to rewrite the policies and share the information with staff and students.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Schools Remain Compliant With Anti-Discrimination Policies

Staying compliant with Title IX and other anti-discrimination policies is the safest way to protect students and staff. If you are encountering problems with harassment or a flawed anti-harassment policy, contact a Philadelphia employment lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Complete an online form or call 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on How can Schools Prevent Gender Identity Discrimination?
  Other posts by

Can Employers Ask Job Applicants About Salary History?

By ,

Salary-History

Applying for a job can be a long and difficult process. Many job seekers will respond to dozens of job posts weekly, hoping one will call back and offer an interview. After weeks and possibly months of waiting, one sticking point can ruin chances: salary expectations.

While most employers are legally allowed to ask candidates about their past salaries, there is a growing movement to stop this uncomfortable practice. Many states have passed laws to bar the question. A study published last year by researchers at Boston University and Boston University School of Law has shown that this shift has helped black and female workers, often suffering from pay gaps, to garner more compensation.

This debate has become increasingly important, as millions wait to re-enter the workforce following massive layoffs from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Many are leaving low-paying jobs in customer service and trying to find more lucrative positions. As companies compete to fill these roles, asking about salary history will face increased scrutiny.

Where Have Legislators Banned Salary History Questions?

Since 2017, there has been a trend of legislatures prohibiting or dissuading employers from asking job applicants to disclose their previous salaries. Some of these states include:

 

  • Alabama
  • California
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • Delaware
  • District of Columbia
  • Georgia
  • Illinois
  • Louisiana
  • Maine
  • Maryland
  • Massachusetts
  • New Jersey
  • New York
  • North Carolina
  • Oregon
  • Pennsylvania
  • Virginia

 

 

In addition to some form of statewide bans, cities like Philadelphia, New Orleans, Salt Lake City, and Louisville have enacted local laws to keep employers from asking about salary history. It is recommended that job applicants inform themselves about what the laws are when applying in certain places, especially when considering moving to a different state or metro market.

Why Do Salary Histories Matter?

Employers have used salary histories in the past to discriminate and exclude certain candidates and potentially save money by offering less salary than what is budgeted. This practice has also been cited as a major factor in maintaining and furthering the pay gap between races and genders. Disclosing a below-market wage would likely encourage future employers to continue undervaluing a worker, offering a less significant pay increase with a new position.

What can Applicants Do to Avoid Salary History Questions?

There are a few ways to work around the question if applicants are uncomfortable. When responding to an online post, leave the entry blank if not required, or enter $0 or $1 if an entry is needed. During an interview, there are tactful ways to avoid answering or politely refusing. If the position is in an area where the question is banned, it should not be asked at all.

More job postings now include salary ranges. A great way to avoid the question is to know what is expected in the industry or position. Noting what someone at a rival company makes can help when salary is not disclosed. Applicants are encouraged to ask employers during the interview process about salary if not provided upfront.

If disclosing salary voluntarily, do so if comfortable. If moving to a larger market with a higher cost of living, it might help to determine if the position offers fair value. Also, do not lie about previous salaries. Employers can usually spot that easily and will likely dismiss dishonest applicants. For further help, it is important to speak to a lawyer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Clients with Employment-Based Predicaments

Job seekers have enough to worry about without dealing with illegal and underhanded practices by potential employers. Sometimes, it takes a skilled advocate to help resolve issues. The Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. have the experience to fight for your rights. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online for an initial consultation. Based in Philadelphia, we proudly serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Can a Business Owner Sue a Customer for Posting a Negative Review?

By ,

Nowadays, posting an online review about a business is easy. The consumer simply shares their experience on social media platforms. While many consumers use these platforms to post positive reviews about companies, unhappy or dissatisfied customers will also share their negative experiences. These reviews can be very helpful to other prospective customers because it helps them to discard unprofessional companies. However, poor reviews can ruin a company’s reputation. When a review is untrue, the business owner may be able to sue the customer for defamation. An experienced business lawyer can review the details of the case and determine whether the business owner has grounds for a lawsuit.

According to a Pew Research Center study, 82 percent of adults say that they read online reviews at least some of the time. Customers have every right to post their opinions online about whether or not they were happy with their experiences with businesses. However, when the comments are factually inaccurate or untrue, there may be grounds for a defamation lawsuit.

What is the Best Way to Respond to a Negative Review?

Even if a negative comment qualifies as defamation and the business owner ultimately pursues a defamation lawsuit, the following are effective strategies that business owners can use to handle negative reviews:

  • Request to remove the negative comment. The business owner may contact the owner of the website and request that the factually inaccurate and defamatory comments be removed. It is important to keep in mind, however, that the owner of the website is not legally obligated to remove the negative review.
  • Post a constructive response. One of the best ways to address a negative review is to post a thoughtful and gracious response. Respond to the specific issues that were brought up in the review, and inform the customer that proactive steps are being taken to address the problem and ensure that it does not happen again.
  • Generate positive online reviews. When products and services are consistently strong, customers are more likely to post positive reviews. Businesses should always strive to provide excellent goods and services to their customers.

There is a right way and a wrong way to respond to a negative review. The following are examples of what not to do when a customer posts a negative online review:

  • React too quickly. After reading a negative comment, it may be tempting to respond immediately. However, if the response is negative and was made in the heat of the moment, it can make the situation worse. Take some time to calm down before responding, and put together a response that is measured and professional.
  • Ignore the comment. Despite being difficult to read, business owners should not ignore or disregard negative comments because they are critical or disparaging. Consider whether there is any truth behind the comments; it may be an opportunity to make some changes or improvements going forward.
  • Retaliate against the reviewer. This can cause problems in the future for a business owner, particularly if they plan to proceed with a defamation lawsuit.

Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) lawsuit is a civil complaint or counterclaim that a business owner can file against an individual or an organization who posted a negative online review. Oftentimes, filers do so in order to protect an economic interest as well as their professional reputation.

However, before filing a SLAPP lawsuit, it is important for business owners to understand that Pennsylvania has passed anti-SLAPP laws that prevent individuals or businesses from censoring critics with the threat of a lawsuit. For help understand the legal options after a negative business review, it is beneficial to speak to a business lawyer.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Assist Business Owners with Defamation Lawsuits

If a customer posted a negative review about your company and the comments were unfair or untrue, the Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. will help you seek compensation for the loss of customers and income caused by the false statements. For an initial consultation, call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on Can a Business Owner Sue a Customer for Posting a Negative Review?
  Other posts by

National Coffeehouse Chain Reaches Settlement Over Racial Bias in Promotions

By ,

In March 2021, Starbucks entered into a voluntary agreement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) over accusations of racial bias in the promotion of employees. While there were no singular cases or incidents pointing to this accusation, the company did submit a new plan for promoting internally. The standardized methods will mandate managers to follow company procedures in the hiring of new employees and the promotion of existing ones. Workers must apply to open positions, internally or externally, to be considered for roles.

Starbucks has been embroiled in race-related controversy before. In 2020, employees raised concerns over censorship of allowed messages with their uniform. The corporation has acknowledged past failures and claims they will strive to do better, including the revision of hiring practices to promote company-wide diversity.

What can Constitute as Bias in Hiring and Employment?

Federal law says employers are not allowed to discriminate against employees or job applicants based on:

  • Race
  • Color
  • Religion
  • Gender or gender identity
  • Sexual orientation
  • Pregnancy status
  • National origin
  • Age
  • Disability

The primary concern in the Starbucks complaint is the implicit bias often linked to informal hiring practices. While some workers will inevitably stand out for superior work performance, oftentimes, offering a new hire or moving an existing employee up the ladder can require a judgement call.

To mitigate this implicit bias, Starbucks has taken away much of that autonomy and will now regulate and track application data and promotional opportunities, establish new training and interview guides for hiring managers, who will be encouraged to make merit-based and equity-based decisions in their process. The company does have more diversity at the retail level compared to the corporate level.

How are Bias Allegations Handled?

The EEOC tries to keep current and prospective employees from experiencing bias by offering preventative measures, including educational programs, employer outreach programs, and technical assistance. The commission operates 53 field offices across the United States.

Despite all the resources available and the established laws, there are still instances where job applicants and employed workers feel they are being discriminated. The EEOC will cover most companies with 15 or more employees, 20 or more in the case of age discrimination, along with unions and employment agencies. They handle claims involving:

  • Hiring
  • Firing
  • Promotion
  • Harassment
  • Training
  • Wages
  • Benefits

A worker bringing a claim to the EEOC can expect the commission to investigate the claim fairly and accurately. The commission will make a finding and attempt to resolve if discrimination has occurred. In some cases, the EEOC will file a lawsuit if the issue is not corrected, the actions are particularly egregious, or if there is a wider concern that affects more employees beyond the company in question. To strengthen a claim, a discriminated worker should speak to a lawyer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Workers with Discrimination Cases

Despite state and federal laws, many employees continue to experience discrimination at work. If you need help with your discrimination case, the Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help you get the relief you deserve. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

  Category: Discrimination
  Comments: Comments Off on National Coffeehouse Chain Reaches Settlement Over Racial Bias in Promotions
  Other posts by