Hello all,
Settle an argument for me, please. My roommate’s boyfriend says that it is legal to ask the applicant’s race on a typical, standard job application.
I am certain that it is illegal to ask race on a job app. AT ALL. Now, on applications for, I don’t know, maybe college loans or public assistance, it might be different. But for a job, I know they can’t ask.
Am I mistaken?
Results of a Google search using the terms “race job application question”
It seems evident that they can ask, but that’s treading into dangerous waters in two ways. By asking they might want to boost their percentages for hiring minorities, but a case can be made under certain circumstances that an applicant may be rejected on the basis of race. Also, while EOE is not a bad thing, you can go too far in implementing it, and that opens you up for “reverse discrimination” lawsuits.
It’s much safer not to ask at all, but it’s apparently still done. Although, we have this:
It’s for you to decide whether it’s an affirmative defense against charges of racism or not.
“Reverse discrimination” is a discriminatory term by itself and should not be used. It implies that EOE laws were written and designed only for certain groups and not others. In other words, it implies laws against illegal racial discrimination only apply to people who are not white. This is incorrect. The laws applies equally to everyone, regardless of their race, and have applied equally since they were enacted. While historically the majority of race discrimination suits were filed by non-whites, the fact remains anyone may file a suit if they feel a non-merit decision was made based on their race. The law hasn’t changed. What has changed are people’s perception of the law. Today as more and more non-whites fully assume positions of power, influence and decision-making in employment, whites are now filing suits under the same law and for the same reasons, as non-whites have been doing since the laws were enacted. This process is now being incorrectly called “reverse discrimination.” Sorry, using that term is discriminatory. It’s just “discrimination,” or more accurately, “illegal discrimination.”
While asking non-merit questions on a job application may not be illegal all the time, it is a bad business practice. According to the EEOC:
I would proceed with caution with any potential employer that has non-merit questions on a job application form. Depending upon the size of the employer you may or may not be able to effectively research the company employment history to see if it has a track record of illegal hiring and employment practices. This may be the beginning of the 21st century, but job discrimination is very much alive across America.
Thanks for those erudite and very eloquent answers. Wow, ignorance fought once again, sadly my own. I really didn’t think it was still legal, partly because I can’t remember the last time I saw a job app which asked my (or anyone’s) race.
But also, because I thought “affirmative action”, as such, was removed as an official practice several years ago. Looking it up, I see that it was only as respects the State University system, and only in some states.
Classic California tunnel vision.
The laws were put in place not to protect white men, but minorities. So yes reverse discrimination is a valid term. These laws were SPECIFICALLY written to protect minorities. No one sat down and said “Gee white men need protection.” They only included white men as an afterthought
They just included white men to cover themselves, but that is not the intent of the law. Just as the 13th Amendement bans involuntary servitude, that means slavery not the draft.
Certain local and state laws also prohibit asking questions, but what has happened twofold is that most applications make questions like race, optional. Or they put the applications online and make it impossible for you to opt out. If you complain then it was “a programming error,” that never seems to get fixed.
Bottom line is it isn’t always the questions but the way it’s asked. You can’t ask, “Where do you live?” But you can ask “do you live within an hour commuting distance of this job.” You can’t ask “how old you are,” but can ask “Are you over the age to perform the necessary duties for this job.” (Such as serve alcohol).
A skilled interviewer can manipulate these questions to get applicants to volunteer information.
Then you get stuck with the “catch-22” Let’s say it comes down to two applicants of equal value, the first one “volunteered” information, the second one didn’t. Who get’s the job? Who do you think?
Almost all companies remain silent on applications processes issuing only a “we found a candidate that better matches our needs” if called to explain. Note that explination doesn’t even say “better qualified,” indeed the better qualified candidate may lack other skills, like people interaction.
I went through interviewer training with my company which is one of the largest and oldest US firms.
Our HR person specifically told us to ask an interviewee to fill out the race check boxes in her/his application. If he/she did’nt then we were to use our best guess to his/her race. Our HR says it has to do with equal oppurtunity or something.
Being unemployed and trying to find work, I’m finding every application has a section on race, age and gender that the employers claim will be detached and used for collecting data about diversity recruitment goals. I leave them blank; I’m a white male, but still, I don’t know if the information will really be detached or not.
Every application I’ve filled out also asks for a Social Security number. I thought that is illegal. I usually fill it out as XXXX-XX-(last four digits).
Haven’t seen any that ask for religion, but I do see applications that ask for the names of volunteer organizations and community groups one is involved in. Answering those can offer a hint to one’s religion and political orientation to an employer, so I leave those blank too.
Not illegal, but not the most secure practice. I’d just write a note “will provide when needed” or something like that. From a practical matter, it does smooth the onboarding process to have the SSN ready to enter the new employee into the payroll system right away. Similarly, it can smooth background and credit checks for jobs where those apply. In the olden days before rampant identity theft, it just made sense to ask for the SSN so there was one less thing to worry about as you got the new employee on board.
I would write a note rather than leave it blank. Blanks on job applications tend to be interpreted as poor attention to detail (although most in HR are accustomed to people choosing not to disclose race and sex and leaving those sections blank).
Every job I’ve had included a EOE form with the other hiring documents. It states clearly, in bold, “This form is for EOE purposes only, disclosure of race is purely voluntary”. Or something of that sort.
Move along.
In my new position, I have the opportunity to go through applications. They are submitted to our HR folks, who then forward me the appropriate sections on experience, education, any essay questions, and so on. They are not supposed to send information on race, ethnicity, age, married status, and that type of information that does not have a direct bearing on the applicant’s ability to do the work. So at least in our organization, that information is detached.
Do you have a cite for this? Can you point out in the laws themselves where the “not for whites” disclaimer is? I’m particularly intrigued since I know one of the EEOC lawyers who’s been at his job since the late 60s and his knowledge doesn’t reflect this. The laws themselves are blind. It’s the perception of those laws that have changed.
Unless the job to one is applying has a bonafide, legitimate and legal reason as to why race or gender, as examples, are legal requirements for a position, you cannot be compelled to answer them, and refusing to answer them can have no bearing on the selection process.
If someone asked such questions of me, I would hold the interview process as highly suspect. It’s irrelevant to the job as to how I will get there. It’s none of their business.
As to the second question, it’s poorly worded. As asked, it would reflect upon that employer’s HR approach to hiring and I would find it suspect. If the job requires serving alcohol, and the laws requires one be of legal age, a question such as “This position has a statutory requirement that anyone who in this job must be of legal age in the state. Do you meet the statutory requirement?” Asking the question within the context of a known, and verifiable legal requirement, keeps the interviewer from straying into dangerous territory.
It is also possible in some locations the law allow underage age servers serving alcohol. If the attempt to to weed out these folks, but the law allows underage servers, this would be a hard case to win since ADEA only kicks at age 40.
This is a fact of life. To counteract this, job applicants need to have similar skills to recognize this.
A hiring authority can make legitimate and legal decisions about who to hire without ever having to resort to using illegal means.
This happens all the time.
The key is that while it’s legal to ask, you are entirely within your rights to refuse to answer, and (IME) every job application specifically notes this.
Your Social Security number is a different story; the Privacy Act of 1974 restricts its use by government agencies, but private organizations can ask you to provide it pretty much whenever they want.
Moving outside the US.
I’ve been asked my ethic origin and religious affiliation on every job application I’ve filled in. Unfortunately, you can’t opt out of answering here. In Northern Ireland it’s for the purposes of meeting legislation on Equal Opportunities and is centrally compiled by the governement.
I fill those things out based on how I’m feeling at the time.
Usually as “White-other”, “White-Irish” or “Mixed race” and I either tick the Protestant, Catholic and Other boxes if I can make more than one choice for religious affilation, or the Neither box if I have to pick one option. The question about religious affilation was not designed for the child of a Protestant man and a half Catholic /half Jewish woman.
I think you may be a bit confused there on some pretty basic points. Unlike race, religion is not something you inherit; it’s something you choose, and the vast majority of religions are mutually exclusive. Thus there’s no such religion as half Catholic/half Jewish, and even if there were, the fact that your mother is a member of that faith doesn’t necessarily mean that you are too.
psychonautActually in Northern Ireland religion is something you inherit.
The question is phrased:
I’m from a Catholic background
I’m from a Protestant background
I’m from Neither background
Other
It’s not asking which religion you practice, it’s asking whose side you’re on in the Troubles.
Ticking either of the top boxes alone puts me firmly in one box or the other, ticking the bottom box alone takes me out of the game and isn’t very representative, but is better than aligning myself with any particular side.
I beg to differ. My mother is a Jew, therefore I am a Jew. That’s according to traditional Jewish law. It isn’t a faith. It’s more like a tribe.
Your religion may vary.