Online Job Ads May Violate Anti-Bias Laws, Says Letter From Federal Official

Printer friendly	E-mail article	Subscribe	Order reprints
	Discuss any Chronicle article in our forums
Latest Headlines Universities Must Disclose More Data on Animal Research A court settlement requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to make public more information about research on animals, prompting some academic researchers to worry about further attacks by animal-rights extremists. 2-Year Colleges Streamline Student Aid and Focus on Counseling For Provost Who Fled Lebanon, U. of Dayton Is His 'Village' Letters Home From World War II Soldiers Are Found in College Basement

By ANDREW MYTELKA

Washington

Colleges and other employers that advertise job openings only online may be violating federal antidiscrimination laws, according to a letter issued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The letter was also posted on the Web site of the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources.

The letter does not deal with a particular case of alleged discrimination. Rather, it responds to what appears to be an inquiry about whether various practices in online recruitment may be discriminatory under one or more federal laws, including the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The name of the author of the original inquiry has been blacked out of the response letter, which was written by Peggy R. Mastroianni, associate legal counsel in the EEOC's office here.

In the letter, Ms. Mastroianni says that her "informal discussion" of the issues should not be understood as the agency's official position. She also writes that the courts have not ruled on challenges to Internet-based hiring.

The letter, which was released after a Freedom of Information Act request, says online recruiting and hiring may violate antidiscrimination laws in two general ways: if the job searches have a disparate impact on different groups and if the searches require job seekers to disclose certain information to potential employers. The letter then discusses several examples of each type of potential discrimination.

Online hiring might have a disparate impact if, for example, recruitment for a position is conducted on the Internet, job seekers can apply only on an employer's Web site, and the online materials are not compatible with software that sight-impaired job seekers could use to read them, the letter says.

"It could be argued," the letter continues, that such a situation demonstrated the employer's failure to make reasonable accommodation for the disabled job seeker, as required under the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Another possible source of violations of anti-bias laws might be an employer's use of an Internet-based hiring process to collect information about job seekers that would facilitate discrimination against them.

For example, the letter says, some employers might require applicants to complete an online "voluntary EEOC questionnaire" that solicits personal information on race, gender, and national origin.

Such a questionnaire is lawful, the letter says, as long as responding to it is "truly voluntary" and not a requirement to proceed with a job application. Data drawn anonymously from the questionnaires are commonly used by employers to demonstrate compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws.