Upcoming schedule

1. Upcoming schedule Today Unit 8 lecture part 1 Thursday (4/13): Unit 8 lecture part 2 Next Tuesday (4/18): Exam 8 Any extra credit is due Next Thursday (4/20) No lecture Return of exam 8 Make-up exam 2 objectives Two weeks from today (Tuesday April 25th) Make-up exam 2

2. Unit 7 exam Review exam question 5

3. Exam 7 #1a Employee 1 earns $6.00 an hour and works 8 hours every day. His commission incentive is 5%. His standard performance is $95.00. On Monday he charged customers $140.00. How much did he earn for the day?

4. Exam 7 #1b Employee 1 earns $6.00 an hour and works 8 hours every day. His commission incentive is 5%. His standard performance is $95.00. On Tuesday he charged customers $76.00. How much did he earn for the day?

5. Exam 7 #5

6. Exam 7 #25 Contrast Effect: Allowing the quality of the applicants who preceded the present applicant to influence the ratings of the present applicant

7. Exam 7 #26 Kirk makes a big proposal to the board of directors. They all seem to be impressed and he is certain that he is going to get his proposal accepted. At the end of his presentation, Kirk makes a sexist joke (�this proposal is so simple that even a woman would understand�). It is immediately obvious that all of the board members are offended by his joke. As a result, Kirk knows it is unlikely that his proposal will be accepted. From a behavior analysis point of view, was Kirk�s joke telling punished?

8. Exam 7 #26 Did he tell more or less sexist jokes (or even jokes in general) in the future? Unknown

9. Exam 7 #26

10. Exam 7 #26

11. Exam 7 #26

12. Unit 8Selection and PlacementFinal unit! Gatewood and Feild

13. Overview of selection

14. Selection Recall that�s there two types of performance problems Can�t do Won�t do Already discussed one way of dealing with the �can�t do� problem Training Another way of dealing with the �can�t do� problem Good selection program

15. What is selection? The process of collecting and evaluating information about an individual in order to extend an offer of employment Either a first position for a new employee Or a different position for a current employee Performed under legal and environmental constraints Addresses the future interests of the organization

16. Basic objective of selection Separate, from a pool of applicants for a job, those that have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) to perform well on the job. To do so, the selection specialist must systematically collect information from the applicants about how much of the necessary KSA each possesses.

17. Crucial Issue in Selection The crucial issue is not whether an organization can collect information from applicants and then decide which are to be given employment offers. The issue is whether the organization can collect information from applicants about individual characteristics that are closely related to job performance and effectively use these data to identify the best applicants for employment offers

18. Steps in the Development of Selection Program Job analysis Identification of relevant job performance dimensions Identify the KSAs necessary for the job Development of assessment devices to measure KSAs Validation of assessment devices Use of assessment devices in the processing of applicants

19. 1. Job Analysis Job analysis: the gathering of information about a job in an organization Information should describe: Tasks or activities engaged in The results of those tasks or activities The equipment and materials used The individuals The environment

20. 2. Identification of relevant job performance dimensions What constitutes successful job performance? What do the workers need to know and be able to do upon entering the job to be successful at the job? Some things can be learned on the job and therefore are less critical in the selection process

21. 3. Identify the KSAs necessary for the job These are the prerequisites to performance What must a worker know? What skills and abilities must he or she possess to perform the critical job tasks?

22. 4. Development of assessment devices to measure KSAs Once you�ve identified the KSAs needed, you have to measure those KSAs in applicants for the job Tests Interview questions Demonstrations of skills Etc.

23. Not enough At this point in the process many organization call it good They know what they are looking for and have a means of determining which applicants possess the appropriate KSAs But still need to test whether the KSAs you have selected truly are critical to successful job performance. You do this through�

24. 5. Validation of assessment devices Validation is the steps taken to collect and evaluate information to determine whether the worker characteristics thought to be important to job performance are, in fact, related to successful job performance If not, you need to revise So that you get the best people Legal reasons

25. 6. Use of assessment devices in processing of applicants Once you�re sure your assessment methods work, use them.

26. Why not more information? Better selection decisions can be made when the data collected are accurate and complete. The greater the amount of accurate data collected, the more complete the assessment will be. So, why do selection specialists only obtain limited information?

27. Why numbers (measurement)? Why are numbers necessary in the selection process? Because they facilitate comparison of people Gives you information better than words alone Permit statistical manipulation, which provides even more information about the selection program

28. Problem of measurement The problem for selection specialists is to ensure that the numbers generated are actually accurate descriptions of the characteristics of the applicant, job, or job performance Can measure anything But should only measure what�s important Analyze measurements in a meaningful way

29. Legal issues with selection

30. Why selection matters (legally) Very important for a company to adopt clear, effective, measurable selection procedures that do not unfairly discriminate between groups of individuals Those procedures should measure only the person�s ability to do a job Must be able to prove that your procedures are measuring only that Otherwise, organization is very vulnerable if discrimination charges are brought against them

31. Two major objectives of every selection program To maximize the probability of making accurate selection decisions about applicants To ensure that these selection decisions are carried out in such a manner as to minimize the chance of a judgment of discrimination being made against organization

32. Equal Employment Opportunity EEO regulation is directed at addressing social and economic problems It is directed toward the solution of national issues such as employment inequalities

33. EEO Regulations Two components: The laws and executive orders that state general principles and empower regulatory agencies (EEOC, OFCC, federal courts, state courts, state agencies) Court decisions that interpret these general principles in specific situations

34. EEO Laws and Executive Orders EEO laws are federal laws whose purpose is the elimination of discrimination in HR management decisions EEO executive orders are statements made by the executive branch of the government intended for the same purpose, but aimed at organizations that do business directly with the government

35. Regulatory Model of EEO

36. ADA of 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act Prohibits pre-employment inquires about a person�s disability. Places the responsibility on the disabled person to bring any relevant disability to the employer�s attention. Many applications will specifically ask if you have a disability that would interfere with your ability to perform a job. This is illegal.

37. Disparate treatment / impact EEO laws and executive orders prohibit discrimination in selection. But what precisely is discrimination? One of two things: Disparate treatment Disparate impact (adverse impact)

38. Disparate Treatment Refers to those situations in which different standards are applied to various groups of individuals, even though there may not be an explicit statement of intentional prejudice Example: Not hiring women with young children but hiring men with young children Example: Hiring minorities for cleaning positions in a restaurant and hiring whites with similar qualifications for wait staff or cashiering

39. Disparate Impact When selection standards are applied uniformly to all groups of applicants, but the net result of such standards is to produce differences in the selection of various groups. Example: requiring a high school diploma, which unfairly limits the % of minority applicants Example: height requirements, which unfairly limit women, Asian Americans and Latin Americans

40. Evidence In both types of discrimination there must be evidence that the discrimination has occurred. But the way in which evidence is presented differs depending on whether it is a case of disparate treatment or disparate impact.

41. Title VII discrimination cases In a Title VII discrimination case (discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin) the following steps are involved in presentation of evidence (see table 2.2)�

42. Disparate Treatment Step 1 Plaintiff Demonstrates that he or she belongs to a protected class He or she applied and was qualified for a job for which the company was seeking applicants Despite these qualifications, he or she was rejected After this rejection, the position remained open and the employer continued to seek applicants from persons with the complainant�s qualifications

43. Disparate Treatment Step 2 Defendant Provides a clear and specific job-based explanation for actions

44. Disparate Treatment Step 3 Plaintiff Proves that the defendant�s argument is a pretext and the true reason for rejection was prejudice

45. Disparate Impact Step 1 Plaintiff Demonstrates statistically that this HRM practice affects various groups differently in comparison to their distribution in the relevant labor market

46. Disparate Impact Step 2 Defendant Demonstrates at least one of the following: Business necessity Bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) Validation data

47. Disparate Impact Step 3 Plaintiff Proves that an alternative practice is available that has less adverse impact

48. BFOQ One way of fighting a discrimination charge is by demonstrating bona fide occupational qualification. A BFOQ defense means that no person of a particular sex, race, color, religion, or national origin can adequately perform the given job. This has mainly been related to sex or religion cases Legally, it is impossible to frame a BFOQ defense for race, color, or national origin

49. Statistics With both forms of discrimination, statistics become important in helping to show the discrimination either did or did not occur Disparate treatment: statistics are mainly used to assist the plaintiff in rebutting the defendant�s explanation of the selection practice under question Disparate impact: statistics are most often used by the plaintiff in demonstrating that a pattern of adverse effect has occurred

50. Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978) These guidelines show how you should set up your selection program. Prior to this time, both the EEOC and the Department of Labor had issued separate guidelines that conflicted with respect to certain procedures.

51. Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978) cont, Problem was that you could not conform to both sets of guidelines. Therefore, you could not avoid the threat of trouble from both agencies. Later the courts ruled that the joint guidelines will be used almost as a checklist for any court cases. Therefore they are very significant.

52. Unacceptable Skills and Abilities According to the joint guidelines, skills and abilities easily learned during a brief training program are not acceptable as selection requirements

53. Affirmative action programs An affirmative action program (AAP) applies to a set of specific actions taken by an organization to meet the objectives of EEO law. Typically an affirmative action plan is created to explicitly state the steps the organization will take in selection.

54. Three situations to adopt AAP Being a government contractor Having lost a court discrimination case or having signed a consent decree Voluntarily attempting to implement EEO principles

55. Government Contractors Most of the EEO laws and executive orders require AAPs for government contractors with contracts of at least $10,000 So, they have good reason to adopt AAPs (they have to)

56. Losing a discrimination case Often a part of losing the case entails that the organization legally has to adopt an AAP So, they also have a good reason to adopt AAPs (they also have to)

57. Voluntary adoption An organization may decide, on its own, to implement an AAP to promote diversity However, this can get tricky In the process of being fair to traditional victims of discrimination, the company may bend over backwards and end up discriminating other groups. By discriminating against those other groups and thus violating parts of Title VII, the organization opens itself to charges reverse discrimination.

58. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) 13 African American employees filed a class-action suit against Duke Power. They were charging discriminatory employment practices The claim was based on newly implemented selection requirements (high school diplomas, passage of a mechanical aptitude test, and an IQ test)

59. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) cont. According to the plaintiffs, these tests unfairly screened out a much higher percentage of African Americans than whites. The requirements did not affect current employees, just future employees (applicants) Duke Power made no attempt to determine the job relatedness of the selection requirements

60. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) cont. A lower district court found in favor of the company on the grounds that there was no discriminatory intent. An appellate court agreed district court

61. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) cont. However, the Supreme Court, in an unanimous decision, reversed the previous decisions The court ruled that a lack of discriminatory intent was not a sufficient defense against the use of employment devices that exclude on the basis of race.

62. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) cont. The court held that tests and other measuring devices must be related to job performance. Duke Power had workers who did not meet the selection requirements (the ones who had been hired before the requirements were put into place). Those workers had performed their jobs successfully Therefore, Duke Power had no evidence relating the selection requirements to job performance

63. Important precedents set by Griggs v. Duke Power The applicant has the burden of proving the adverse impact of a particular selection device Once adverse impact has been established, the burden of proof shifts to the employer The employer must prove the validity or job relatedness of the device

64. OFCCP v. Ozark Air Lines (1986) Airline refused to hire a disabled person as an airline technician Applicant had nonfunctioning left ear, but right ear was unimpaired Airline agreed applicant had necessary qualifications, but refused to hire because of disability and his failure to prove that he could carry out the job duties without harming himself or others

65. OFCCP v. Ozark Air Lines (1986) cont. Applicant won the case Court argued that it was airline�s burden to prove that the applicant�s employment would have endangered him and others Reasonable accommodation must be given to disabled individual

66. Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls (1991) Johnson Controls manufactured car batteries that required significant exposure to lead Many health experts have noted harmful effects lead may have on fetuses. So Johnson Controls did not hire any women Hired women for a brief period but they got pregnant while high lead levels, so quit hiring Eventually Johnson Controls decided to only hire women whose inability to bear children was medically documented

67. Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls (1991) cont. Plaintiffs later filed charges of sex discrimination under Title VII Lowers courts decided in favor of Johnson Controls, ruling that discrimination against women was a BFOQ (industry safety was essential part of business)

68. Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls (1991) cont. However, Supreme Court overruled and decided for plaintiffs Unless pregnant employees differ from others �in their ability or inability to work�, they must be treated the same as other employees Company�s morals concerns about health of future children not enough to not hire women Decisions about children left to future parents

69. Questions? Test on Tuesday (4/18)