Statistical Analysis to Identify Intentional Employment Discrimination
National & State Reports; Attack by Employers' Group; Blumrosen's Defend Methodology
2009 Paper for the ILO conference on Regulating for Decent Work
MERGING EMPLOYMENT DATA WITH LEGAL ANALYSIS
What is EEO1?
EEO1.com is devoted to the mining and analysis of employment statistics to identify employment discrimination.
For decades, the EEOC and OFCCP have required employers with 100 or more employees (50 or more, if the company is a federal contractor) to file annual reports of the composition of each occupation and industry in their workforce by race, national origin and sex for each of the company's locations.
EEO1.com reports are based on this Federal datasource. These are the first reports to analyze on a comparative basis the EEO-1 data collected by the government at the national and state level, contributing to our knowledge of the state of intentional discrimination in America today.
Under current law, statistics may be used to determine whether the cumulative effect of individual employment decisions evidence an intent by an employer to base those decisions on the race, national origin or sex of an applicant or employee rather than on the occupational requirements of a job. The cases compare the composition of an establishment's workforce with that of the local community and hold that a difference of more than two standard deviations could evidence intentional discrimination.
EEO1.com reports analyze the workforce of geographical areas (MSAs) and provide detailed information of industries and occupations by race, national origin and sex in 1999, with "bigger picture" historical analysis from 1975.
With this information, an employer could do a comparative analysis for itself that indicates how the composition of the workforce in a particular establishment compares with the workforce of the entire industry within the same metropolitan area. These reports could allow employers to evaluate objectively the success of their compliance program and pinpoint those areas where those programs can be improved. The reports might also be used by employers in evaluating the strength of any claims based on Title VII and, during litigation, could be offered as proof of their compliance with the law.
CONCLUDING THE NATIONAL REPORT COMPARING STATES IN THE SEVERITY AND PERSISTENCE OF INTENTIONAL JOB DISCRIMINATION, Appendix 4 of the Study, was the subject of a BNA Daily Labor Report article on 9/30/2002.
Al and Ruth Blumrosen, professors at Rutgers University Law School, found that approximately 75% of large establishments did not appear to discriminate, in the statistics, while mainly hard core discriminators were responsible for the two million minorities and women who were affected by continuing intentional job discrimination. Even so, the study was attacked by the EEAC, an employer group.
See concise explanations of highlights from the Study,
The Reality of Intentional Job Discrimination in Metropolitan America -- 1999
Attack by the EEAC, an Employers' Group
The Blumrosens' defend employers' credibility and their study
Please send general comments to comments@EEO1.com.
Each page of this website has navigation bars at the top and bottom.
Click on a hyperlink to learn about the use of statistics
in proving intentional employment discrimination and the
reports that are available through our company that provide statistical evidence
to assist in proving or disproving the existence of intentional discrimination.
© 2010 - 2009 - 2003 - 2000. All rights reserved.
Product names and various content (including but not limited to audio, video, and graphics)
are trademarks of their respective owners.
Website founded September 1, 2000.