J. Racial Discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and various other federal and state laws prohibit intentional discrimination based on ancestry or ethnicity. Some employers practice blatant forms of minority discrimination by paying lower salaries and other compensation to blacks and Hispanics. Others engage in quota systems by denying promotions and jobs to individuals on the basis of race or color. Federal laws prohibit employers of 15 or more employees from discriminating on the basis of race or color. Virtually all states have even stronger antidiscrimination laws directed to fighting job-related race and minority discrimination. In some states, companies with fewer than eight employees can be found guilty of discrimination.

Both federal and state laws generally forbid private employers, labor unions, and state and local government agencies from:

• Denying an applicant a job on the basis of race or color
• Denying promotions, transfers, or assignments on the basis of race or color
• Penalizing workers with reduced privileges, reduced employment opportunities, and reduced compensation on the basis of race or color
• Firing a worker on the basis of race or color

Typically, the EEOC or related state agency will investigate charges of race discrimination or race-related retaliation. The EEOC has broad power to secure information and company records via subpoena, field investigations, audits, and interviewing witnesses, both employees and outsiders. Statistical data may be presented to demonstrate a pattern or practice of discriminatory conduct. As in other forms of discrimination, the contents of an individual's personnel file and the files of others in similar situations are often examined. Data on workplace composition may reveal a pattern or practice of exclusion or channeling. Regional or national data may shed light on whether a decision locally made was, in fact, racially discriminatory.

In cases where circumstantial evidence is presented to prove race discrimination, the burden is on the plaintiff to raise an inference of discrimination. This is often done through the use of statistics and payroll records.

Common areas of exploitation

Although it is legal for employers to pose questions at the hiring interview that test your motivation, maturity, willingness to accept instruction, interest in the job, and ability to communicate, inquiries made to further discriminatory practices are illegal. Common areas of exploitation encompass questions pertaining to color, national origin, citizenship, language, and relatives. For example, it is illegal to ask the following questions under federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines and state regulations:

Color:What is your skin color?

National Origin:-What is your ancestry? What is your mother's native language? What is your spouse's nationality? What is your maiden name?

Citizenship:-Of what country are you a citizen? Are your parents or spouse naturalized or native-born citizens? When did they acquire citizenship? Are you a native-born citizen?

Language:-What is your native tongue? How did you acquire the ability to read, write, and speak a foreign language?

Relatives:-Names, addresses, ages and other pertinent information concerning your spouse, children, or relatives not employed by the company. What type of work does your mother or father do?

Tip:You have the right to refuse to answer any of the above questions at the hiring interview. If you choose not to answer them, you can politely inform the interviewer that you believe the questions are illegal and refuse to answer them on that basis. If you are then denied the job, you may have a strong case for damages after speaking with a representative from the EEOC, the Human Rights Commission, or a knowledgeable lawyer provided you can prove the denial stemmed from a refusal to answer such questions.

Another common area of race discrimination occurs when companies deliberately impose higher hiring standards than necessary, which tends to exclude minorities. All employment criterion requirements must be directly related to the job; minorities cannot be excluded unnecessarily.

Tip:Proving you were individually excluded from a job based on your race or color may be difficult. It is often helpful to obtain statistical data to show that the employer's practices are illegal. For example, if 10 positions for an engineering job were filled and none of the jobs was offered to a minority (or a woman), that may be sufficient to infer that the company violated the law. You would need assistance from a competent lawyer or discrimination specialist to prove this because the rules necessary to prove statistical disparities are complex.

You may have an easier time of demonstrating race discrimination when you are directly treated unfairly on the job. For example, if you are repeatedly harassed and called names on the job, or are treated differently from nonminorities (e.g., you are absent several days from work and are suspended or placed on formal probation, while white workers with the same or a greater number of absences are only given an informal warning), it is best to gather this factual information for discussion with an executive or officer in your company's personnel department. In light of the Supreme Court decision Wards Cove v. Antonio, you may have an easier time proving race discrimination on an individual basis as opposed to relying on statistical disparities. This is because in certain cases employers now only have to offer a business justification for actions that are shown by statistics to have an unfair impact on minorities. The burden then shifts to the complainant to demonstrate that the alleged business justification is not legitimate.