Career Resources, Inc. - Affirmative Action Consultants - Affirmative Action Plan Consultants

Link Share

James Gutierrez — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:49:58 +0000

http://www.articlecirculation.com

Thank you!

James Gutierrez — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 00:20:00 +0000

Thank you for your interest in Career Resources, Inc., Professional EEO/Affirmative Action Services. One of our Team Members will be in touch with you in the next 2 hours.

Sincerely,

Career Resources, Inc.

Congress Questions OFCCP

James Gutierrez — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:51:34 +0000

Congress Questions OFCCP’s Legal Authority to Establish a Numerical Hiring Standard

For the second time in as little as three months Congress has stepped in to shut down the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Program’s (OFCCP) aggressive efforts to expand their jurisdictional role. The first time being when Congress added provisions to the National Defense Authorization Act which removed pharmacies, medical institutions, and other health care providers who participate in the TRICARE network from OFCCP’s jurisdiction.

Most recently the House of Representatives’ Committee on Education and the Workforce (CEW) sent a letter, dated January 27, 2012, to U.S Department of Labor Secretary Hilda Solis outlining their concerns of OFCCP’s December 9, 2011 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding the OFCCP’s legal authority under Section 503 that permits OFCCP to establish numerical hiring standards or quotas.

The letter questions OFCCP’s legal authority and points out conflicts with statutory language of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

OFCCP has been given a deadline of February 10, 2012 to respond to the following requests of CEW:

Identify and explain OFCCP’s statutory authority under Section 503 to establish a numerical hiring standard.
Identify and explain the basis for OFCCP’s decision that federal contractors’ good faith efforts are insufficient with regard to affirmative action under Section 503.
Identify and explain the basis for OFCCP’s assumption that job applicants and contractors’ current employees would understand the legal definition of "disability," as defined in the NPRM’s prescribed self-identification notice.
Under proposed section 60-741.44(b), OFCCP assumes contractors would spend 30 minutes per year to draft written "statement[s] of reasons explaining the circumstances for rejecting individuals with disabilities for vacancies and training programs.” Simple math would suggest the amount of time required would far exceed this estimate.
Explain how OFCCP determined the 30 minutes per year estimate.
Under proposed section 60-741.44(d), OFCCP failed to consider the costs federal contractors would incur to make their "electronic or online job application systems compatible with assistive technology commonly used by individuals with disabilities, such as screen reading and speech recognition software." Likewise,
Under proposed section 60-741.44(g), OFCCP failed to consider the economic burdens associated with discussing the NPRM’s new affirmative action requirements with all employees, during, for example, orientation and training events. Explain why OFCCP failed to consider the costs of contractors’ compliance with these provisions of proposed sections 60-741.44(d) and (g).

What Contractors Should Do

It is clear that the OFCCP’s December 9, 2011 NPRM places an enormous burden on contractors as well as conflicts with existing ADA laws. Contractors should contact their congressional representatives or contact any of the representatives below and voice your concerns.

John Kline

Chairman

Committee on Education and the Workforce

Washington, D.C. Office

2439 Rayburn HOB

Washington, DC 20515

Phone: (202) 225-2271

Fax: (202) 225-2595

George Miller

Senior Democratic Member

House Committee on Education and the Workforce

Washington, D.C. Office

Congressman George Miller

2205 Rayburn HOB

Washington, DC 20515

Phone: (202) 225-2095

Fax: (202) 225-5609

Phil Roe

Chairman

Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions

Washington, DC Office

419 Cannon House Office Bldg

Washington, DC 20515

Phone:

(202) 225-6356

Donald McIntosh

Committee Staff

(202) 225-7101

Joe Wheeler

Committee Staff

(202) 225-7101

New Product Release

James Gutierrez — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:13:16 +0000

SOURCE: Career Resources, Inc.

December 12, 2011 8:00 AM PDT

Affirmative Action Consultancy Career Resources, Inc. Unveils Beta Version of On Demand Website Testing Tool That Determines a Website’s Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities Individuals with Visual Impairments

New Web-Based Application, AuditGenie ™ Allows Individuals and Organizations of All Sizes, the Ability To Test Their Website (or any website) to Determine if it is Accessible to Blind and Visually Impaired Individuals.

AuditGenie™ was developed in response to our clients’ need for a reliable and robust website testing tool. The need arose due to recent court cases, enforcement actions by the Department of Justice, and global awareness of the need for individuals with disabilities to have access to the internet.

San Diego, California — (Press Release – December 12, 2011) – Career Resources, Inc., (www.crincorporated.com), a federal and state regulatory consultancy that represents federal contractors in key areas of industry, today announced the availability of their robust, website testing and validation tool, AuditGenie™.

The AuditGenie™ can "crawl" thousands of web pages on any website and provide both visual and automated reports that identify hidden website programming errors or warnings. Errors or warnings left uncorrected could lead to lawsuits from special interest groups and/or violate ADA regulations.

This unique online web application was developed with the non web developer in mind. Key stake holders in an organization’s risk management team are able to monitor their organization’s website in order to ensure that their web developer is doing their job and that their website is accessible to individuals who are blind, have visual impairments, or other disabilities. “Organizations only have to look to recent court cases to understand the gravity that a non-accessible website can have on their business,” said James Gutierrez, President of Career Resources, Inc.

“Major corporations are now finding themselves in the courts defending allegations of their websites not being accessible to individuals with disabilities. The list includes JetBlue Airways, Amazon, Hotels.com, the Law School Admissions Council, Apple, MLB.com, CVS, Rite-Aid, Radioshack, Staples, Ramada Hotels, Priceline.com, and the list goes on. The recent actions of the DOJ and legal claims ensured that website owners would begin scrambling to find a solution that would be able to test their website and minimize legal risk. “At this point in time no business with an internet presence is safe from these regulations or the courts”, said Ann Nagel, Vice President of Research and Product Development for Career Resources, Inc.

While many organizations debate the impact of correcting website accessibility issues, the Department of Justice, the U.S. Senate, and special interest groups are pushing ahead with their goal to ensure that individuals with disabilities are not discriminated against by being denied access to the internet.

Companies that discount the large market of blind and visually impaired individuals who can and do use the internet are making a huge mistake. The business potential of attracting these individuals as online customers is enormous.

In addition to the potential for increased business, having an accessible website can be extremely useful when applied to social networking, teaching and mentoring, given the opportunities a website presents for personal interaction and collaboration.

Pricing and Availability

The AuditGenie™ beta version is available now at http://www.auditgenie.com. The testing tool is being offered at a 50% discount until January 15, 2012. Website testing starts at $9.95 per month/per website of 50 pages or less.

About Career Resources, Inc.

Career Resources, Inc. is a privately owned federal and state regulatory consultancy that assists companies implement policies, procedures, and self monitoring employment practices as required by state and federal regulations. These include state and federal requirements to ensure the protection of veterans, disabled veterans and individuals with disabilities. Career Resources, Inc. represents companies in key areas of industry across the United States, including Fortune 500 companies.

For more information on Career Resources, Inc., visit: www.crincorporated.com

Contact Information

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

James Gutierrez, 800-820-4080 x 6701 or james@crincorporated.com

Ann Nagel, 800-820-4080 x 6703 or ann@crincorporated.com

Grief and the Loss of a Loved one or a Pet in the U.S Workplace

James Gutierrez — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:16:57 +0000

A study by the Grief Recovery Institute 2003 estimates that $2.4 billion of hidden costs are a part of a $75 billion a year estimated loss in U.S. employee productivity and its associated errors, omissions, and accidents that may be directly attributed to grief – physical and emotional – sustained by an employee who experiences the direct loss of a loved one or a pet. We train HR & managers to do many things, but often the “human side” of dealing with employees is left to chance… click here to join our webinar! For those HR decision makers who never experienced nor shared their lives with a pet, it may seem incomprehensible that animal loss equates to human loss. Transference of human emotions to an animal may result in greater psychological damage than that of its human counterpart. It is that inability to understand that intimate bond between man and animal that results in disruptive behavior in the workplace. It is not suggested that someone who does not share an interest in pets be compelled to forgo their own ideologies and business acuity – a forced upon form of acceptance – for the sake of an employee bound by the chains of pet loss grief. Rather consider the ability to understand the impact of pet loss on the total psyche of the employee as it relates to the workplace. It is through education that an understanding of an employee’s pet loss grief will provide the foundation for the development of a comprehensive pet loss bereavement plan. No business is immune to an employee’s grief and its impact on the workplace environment. According to the AVMA – American Veterinary Medical Association 2007*

In 2006, nearly half of pet owners, or 49.7%, considered their pets to be family members.
There are more than 72 million pet dogs in the U.S.
There are approximately 82 millino pet cats in the U.S.
67% of U.S Households have a pet cat or dog.

The importance of developing a bereavement plan is critical to reducing the $2.4 billion in hidden costs deficit. “Companies help grieving employees become better workers when they show organizational compassion,” says Jane Dutton, Professor of Organizational Behavior University of Michigan.* Professor Dutton also co-conducted a two-year study and found that grieving workers “buoyed” when company leaders respond to their basic needs. “Gestures of Comfort” can be simple and yield a multitude of benefits to the company.* The need for a bereavement plan is self-evident and exists in the workplace on a daily basis. Now is the time to educate the HR decision makers and implement such a plan. Employees know the policy on Human Loss. Why not provide employees with the security of knowing what to expect from their employer when they incur the loss of their beloved pet companion? Employees and the company are part of a connected chain, each linked to one to another, separate but together, and it is only through this connective linkage that business succeeds. Related Article: An Ounce of Prevention – Prolong your pets life! Resources:

AVMA Research Statistics 2007
Grief Reactions Associated in the Workplace 1999
Jane Dutton, Professor Organizational Behavior, University of Michigan
Jeffery Zaslow, Staff Reporter, The Wall Street Journal
Kirsti A. Dyer, M.D., M.S., FAAETS
Society for Human Resource Management

Do You Have Your 2012 Plan for Consistent Success!

James Gutierrez — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 01:59:44 +0000

Do You Have Your 2012 Plan for Consistent Success!
Discover Your Personal Blue Print for Success in 7-Enlightening Steps. Get your 2012 ready now for consistent success! Value-Based Goal Setting & Achievement, Determined by Inspiration, Fueled by Discovery

Cost: $49

Webinar – 75 – 90 minutes

Not your typical goal-setting training!

Learn 7 proven specific steps to create then attain your true goals
Make significant discoveries when it comes to creating and achieving your truest dreams, goals and intentions for a highly successful future!
Goal setting that comes from inspiration and value instead of mere motivation and surfaced desires is highly achievable. This webinar is more than just motivating it will:
Effectively inspire you into taking swift and proper action to achieve your most intense desires both personally and professionally.
Provide you can use each New Year.

Included Bonuses you will receive step by step instruction to:

Design your own values-based ladders which you will find extremely helpful in defining what the most important values are attached to your desired goals.

Create your Personal Story Board based on your goals in 6-9 major areas of your life; and accompanied by Intention/Affirmation Statements.

Most of us never take the time to set short or long term goals for ourselves. When we do we mistakenly set them accordingly to fit our sheer desires and motivation. What we must do is set specific goals based on personal values and inspiration.

Why wait! Get re-acquainted with yourself and your future! Are you ready?

Wed, Oct 5, 2011 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM PDT
Wed, Oct 12, 2011 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM PDT
Wed, Oct 19, 2011 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM PDT
Wed, Oct 26, 2011 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM PDT

Once registered and paid you will receive an email confirming your registration
with information you need to join the Webinar.

System Requirements
PC-based attendees
Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server
Macintosh®-based attendees
Required: Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer

Sexual Harassment Claims Are On The Rise

James Gutierrez — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:21:10 +0000

Sexual harassment claims in the workplace are still on the rise, despite the prevalence of written policies and the establishment of formal investigative procedures by nearly all organizations, according the Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Male claims made up about 12 percent of all cases a decade ago. The most recent statistics show the percentage of lawsuits the EEOC filed on behalf of male victims hit an all-time high, making up 14 percent of all cases.

In November of 2009, for example, the Cheesecake Factory restaurant chain agreed to pay $345,000 to six male employees who claimed they were repeatedly sexually assaulted by a group of male kitchen staffers at a Phoenix-area restaurant.

Other recent sexual harassment cases:

Omnicare to pay $195,000

Subway Operator to pay: $55,000

Denver Hotel Management Company to pay: $105,000

James Gutierrez, President of Career Resources, Inc. a California-based Human Resource consulting firm, states that the increase indicates that employers’ efforts to address sexual harassment must extend beyond simply placing written policies in employee manuals.

Gutierrez suggests a number of things that employers can do to reduce the occurrence of sexual harassment claims in the work place:

1. Put your company’s sexual harassment policy in writing and have every employee read it and sign it. Many larger companies put a copy of the sexual harassment rules along with the hiring paperwork to ensure that every employee has reviewed the information. The policy should be stated in clear, easy to understand language and every employee should be given the opportunity to ask pertinent questions afterward.

2. Adopt a clear zero tolerance policy toward sexual harassment to prevent its occurrence in your workplace. State in no uncertain terms that anyone found guilty of sexual harassment will be terminated immediately, with no exceptions.

3. Explain to all employees that any claim of sexual harassment will be investigated thoroughly in a consistent and objective manner. In addition, all employees should be informed of the proper procedures involved when reporting an incidence of sexual harassment.

4. Review the company’s sexual harassment policy with all employees on an annual basis. This meeting should include a thorough explanation of what sexual harassment is, and how it affects the company in a negative way. Recap all reporting procedures and remind your employees that they have a right to work in a company that is free from sexual harassment.

5. Train employees. At least once a year, conduct training sessions for employees. These sessions should teach employees what sexual harassment is, explain that employees have a right to a workplace free of sexual harassment, review your complaint procedure, and encourage employees to use it. There are excellent and affordable online training course available. Prices range from $3.00 – $35.00.

6. Train supervisors and managers. At least once a year, conduct training sessions for supervisors and managers that are separate from the employee sessions. The sessions should educate the managers and supervisors about sexual harassment and explain how to deal with complaints. There are excellent and affordable online training course available. Prices range from $12.00 to $89.00.

7. Take all sexual harassment claims seriously. Don’t try to comment on the claim or downplay the incident. Write down all of the facts and follow company policy to the letter.

Some states require certain employers to conduct sexual harassment training, while other states strongly encourage employers to provide such training, even if it isn’t legally required. Even if your state doesn’t require or suggest training, it’s still a good idea so that your managers will know what the law is and what to do when employees complain, and, if you find yourself in a lawsuit, you’ll be able to show that you took steps to try to prevent harassment.

Affirmative Action Plan – conducting a desk audit

James Gutierrez — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 04:05:29 +0000

Affirmative Action Plan – when will a desk audit review be necessary?

Each of the OFCCP’s regional offices uses the same basic procedures for conducting a desk audit review of contractor’s compensation practices. Basically, during a desk audit, the agency will examine the following criteria when evaluating a contractor’s compensation practices:

Whether, for at least one pay division, there is a specified difference in average compensation between the groups being compared and, if so, whether at least one group appears to be adversely affected.
After combining the pay divisions meeting the above condition, whether the number of employees in the non-favored group is greater than a specified number and represents a specified percentage of the total employees in that group in the overall workforce.
Whether the overall percentage of the group most adversely affected in the combined pay divisions is larger, by a specified amount, than the overall percentage of the other groups adversely affected.

It should be noted that the criteria above is subject to change.

Expectations when a desk audit reveals potential compensation discrimination

The OFCCP does not consider the outcome of a desk audit to be a final indicator of discrimination. The desk audit is a screening procedure to identify areas requiring further review, including additional data requests, on-site investigation, or witness interviews.

When indicators are found, they will request detailed information on each employee in the overall workforce or appropriately determined subset. The information requested will cover those factors which they have observed to generally influence pay, as well as any influencing factors specific to the contractor. They may request data regarding any or all of the following factors, as appropriate:

Employee ID number or suitable ID for matching purposes
Gender
Race / Ethnicity
Job Title
Grade level or salary classification
Employee location
Time with the company or date of hire
Time in current job or date of last change in grade/title
Date of Birth
Current salary, hourly or annually
Part-time, Full-time, or Temporary status
Exempt or Non-exempt status

The specific additional data requested by the OFCCP will vary depending on the contractor’s pay system and the agency’s investigation. However, they have found that the above data is often helpful in examining a contractor’s compensation practices. Contractors are encouraged to provide this data to the OFCCP electronically whenever possible.

If an evaluation of this additional data continues to reveal an indication of discrimination, they will review the contractor’s compensation practices under the Interpretative Standards for Systemic Compensation Discrimination under E.O. 11246 to determine if a violation of the law has occurred. If there is any question, Career Resources can assist you in making your determination.

OFCCP/AAP regression analysis

James Gutierrez — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 03:59:32 +0000

Discrimination problems lead to regression analysis

When there are indicators of potential systemic compensation discrimination problems, a regression analysis will be conducted. The OFCCP will perform a regression analysis and provide summary results to the contractor in support of a Notice of Violation alleging systemic compensation discrimination. The purpose of the regression analysis is to analyze the relationship between the compensation and the legitimate factors that the contractor uses to determine pay decisions, such as work performed, responsibility level, skills and qualifications, education, performance, or other relevant experience. The regression analysis will show whether or not race and/or gender have statistically significant effects on compensation.

Generally, the OFCCP’s review of the compensation practices follow these basic steps:

# 1: Examination of the contractor’s submission in response to Item Number 11 of the OFCCP Scheduling Letter.

# 2: After assessing the contractor’s submission, OFCCP may ask the contractor for additional compensation or personnel data which will determine whether further investigation is necessary.

# 3: If determined by the OFCCP that further investigation is required, they will conduct an on-site review in order to obtain a full understanding of the company’s pay practices.

#4: Following the on site review to obtain a absolute understanding of the contractor’s pay practices, OFCCP will perform a multiple regression analysis. This is a statistical analysis which will determine whether there are any significant differences in compensation by race and/or gender that are not explained by valid determinations.

Indication of discrimination results in review

If an evaluation of this additional data continues to reveal an indication of discrimination, then they will review the contractor’s compensation practices under the Interpretative Standards for Systemic Compensation Discrimination under E.O. 11246 to determine if a violation of the law has occurred. If there is any question, Career Resources can assist you in making your determination and complete your affirmative action planning.

OFCCP AAP On-Site inspections

James Gutierrez — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 03:41:19 +0000

Audit Of An Affirmative Action Plan (AAP)

The OFCCP is focusing its enforcement activities on a companies AAP to find and resolve what might be called “systemic” discrimination . What they mean by “systemic” discrimination, concerns a recurring practice or continuing policy rather than an isolated act of discrimination.

They have adopted this strategy for four reasons: (1) it prioritizes their enforcement resources for the worst offenders, those who allow discrimination to be their “standard operating procedure” or allow illegitimate employment standards to adversely impact a significant number of women or minority workers or job applicants; (2) it encourages employers to engage in self audits of their employment practices, by increasing the tangible consequences of not self auditing; (3) it achieves maximum leverage of OFCCP resources to protect the greatest number of workers from discrimination; and (4) it complements the compliance assistance strategy, which assists contractors that want to comply voluntarily. To improve the focus on systemic discrimination, OFCCP is using the initial stage of its compliance evaluation process, the desk audit, to determine if significant investigative resources should be devoted to a compliance review. If the desk audit including a review of the Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) reveals significant indicators of systemic discrimination, they will continue the investigation. If the desk audit does not reveal such indications, they will close the review unless there is another basis to believe that an on-site review would be appropriate. However, to ensure compliance with all laws enforced by OFCCP, they will conduct a certain number of on-site reviews on a random basis. Career Resources can assist you with your on-site visits and to ensure you are compliant.

Maximizing Resources of an AAP Review

Generally speaking the OFCCP wants to maximize the impact of its enforcement resources by focusing on the cases and reviews of Affirmative Action Plan with significant statistical indicators and large class cases. This is not to say that OFCCP will not pursue evidence of racial or sexual harassment or of discrimination that does not involve large numbers of affected persons, but rather that the OFCCP’s focus will be on those cases which have the greatest potential impact.

After the evaluation of my AAP process has been completed, will your company be evaluated again?

It is OFCCP’s policy not to revisit a company within 24 months after the completion of a Affirmative Action Plan compliance evaluation.

(Note: A compliance check conducted within the last 12 months only exempts the contractor establishment from another compliance check; it does not exempt the contractor establishment from being scheduled for a compliance evaluation of your Affirmative Action Plan.)

What is a affirmative action plan compliance evaluation?

James Gutierrez — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 03:39:06 +0000

Affirmative Action Plans Part of The Compliance Review

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) conducts compliance evaluations of Federal contractors to make sure their compliance with their affirmative action plans include equal opportunity and non-discrimination requirements. A compliance evaluation consists of any one or any combination of the following four investigative procedures:

Compliance review — consists of a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of each aspect of hiring and employment practices, policies and conditions. This includes such things as hiring, training, employment benefits, promotion, etc. This particular review begins with a desk audit which consists of a review of the Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) and supporting documentation; and it may also include an on-site review, conducted at the contractor’s establishment, to investigate problem areas identified during the desk audit.
Off-site review — a review of records that may consist of a full desk audit, which is a review of the contractor’s Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) or portions thereof, or a review of particular records such as personnel data.
Focused review — an on-site review restricted to one or more components of the contractor’s organization or one or more aspects of the contractor’s employment practices.
Compliance check — a determination of whether the contractor has maintained records consistent with 41 CFR 60-1.12; at the contractor’s option the documents may be provided either on-site or off-site.

Your affirmative action plans and self audits

The OFCCP has published a technical assistance guide for construction contractors, and has published the Federal Contract Compliance Manual (FCCM). Both have sections that address techniques for performing contractor self audits. The manual is available on the OFCCP web site. They are working on a new technical assistance guide and other compliance assistance materials that will provide additional guidance on performing self audits of a variety of personnel practices. Career Resources can assist you with a review of your Affirmative Action Plan, equal opportunity and non-discrimination requirements.

OFCCP Selection Process

James Gutierrez — Thu, 19 May 2011 08:21:20 +0000

How does OFCCP select contractors establishment for a compliance evaluation?

OFCCP’s Federal Contractor Selection System (FCSS) is an administratively neutral selection system that uses multiple information sources and analytical procedures to identify Federal contractor establishments for evaluation. The FCSS process may include the use of EEO-1 reports; development of threshold requirements, such as establishment size; random sampling; analysis of external Federal contract databases to better establish jurisdictional coverage; and a mathematical model that ranks Federal contractor establishments based on an indicator of potential workplace discrimination. OFCCP also schedules evaluations based on a variety of other factors, such as contract award notices, directed reviews, as a result ofconciliation agreement monitoring or individual or class complaints, or as part of the agency’s Corporate Management Compliance Evaluation (CMCE) or Functional Affirmative Action Plan (FAAP) initiatives.

One of the component’s of OFCCP’s selection system involves the use of a mathematical model that predicts the likelihood of a finding of systemic discrimination. The mathematical model is based on external research conducted by research firm Westat. Westat thoroughly analyzed data from five years of OFCCP compliance evaluations to formally identify and characterize relationships between reported EEO-1 workforce profiles and findings of discrimination (defined as a compliance evaluation that resulted in a conciliation agreementin the amount of $100,000 or more between 1995 to 2000). OFCCP’s Division of Statistical Analysis further refined the Westat model to incorporate recently released Census data. The mathematical model involves multiple factors that compare the workforce profile of the establishment to those of establishments in the same industry classification and to that of the local labor market using 2000 Census data.

Contractors should note that while the mathematical model that is part of this system does assign a higher likelihood of discrimination to some establishments than others, and that this measure was used to make selections, a test of the model is underway. OFCCP also is researching other targeting methods and data sources to continually update the system. Furthermore, while the model develops an individual establishment measure, OFCCP does not rely upon those measures to conclude that discrimination exists in a particular establishment. The strength of such measures rests in their use in an aggregate setting to separate a large group of establishments with higher values from those with lower ones, which only on average, we expect to have greater need for a compliance evaluation. Given the limited conclusions that can be drawn from the individual results, contractors should not consider the model a tool for identifying discrimination at their establishments.

For more information contact James Gutierrez – james@crincorporated.com

HR Consultant Partner

James Gutierrez — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:53:16 +0000

Career Resources, Inc. (CRI), an affirmative action and diversity consultancy with clients in 43 states, is interested in creating a strong strategic relationship with Human Resource Consultants in locations nationwide.

Here’s our goal:

We are looking to increase our affirmative action business by generating successful referrals from HR Consultants like you.

We are interested in you offering our online Sexual Harassment Training program to your clients and receive up to 50% of revenues generated from your clients.

What’s in it for you?

We want to put money in your pocket!

CRI pays $500 for each successful affirmative action plan referral.
Receive up to 50% of revenues generated from your clients purchasing our online Sexual Harassment Training program.
CRI is interested in referring you to their existing clients as a preferred HR

Consultant Partner for services such as:

Company HR Policies & Procedures
Compensation & Benefit Surveys
Conflict & Dispute Resolution
Employee Relations & Investigations
Executive Coaching
HR Compliance Assessments/Audits
Human Resources Support
Job Description Preparation & Review
Legally Required Harassment Prevention Training
Overtime Exempt vs. Non-Exempt Analysis
Preparation & Review of Employee Handbooks
Terminations, Separations, Layoffs & Reductions in Force

How to get started:

Tell us something about yourself;

“James and Career Resources have been our AAP provider for several years so when our corporate office chose to consolidate under one vendor I made sure CRI was selected. Our experience as well as our sister organizations within Cobham continue to be very satisfied with the responsiveness, professionalism and results we receive. They have supported us through several AA plan generations and a couple OFCCP audits. I strongly recommend James and his team!” Nyla Marson, Senior HR Manager at Cobham Sensor Systems

“James Gutierrez and his staff offer expert level support and advice. Working with James and his organization is a pleasure.” Dan Gilbreath, Executive Director SDSU Research Foundation

“James is one of the “good guys”. He continually strives to make his clients experience the best that it can possibly be. He has a unique and genuine way of relating to others. He truly cares about people and I can’t think of anybody better that I would rather do business with.” Tim Hove, Media Consultant, Super Media

“I contracted with James and Career Resources, Inc. to assist my company when we were audited by the OFCCP. CRI did a very professional and thorough job in guiding us in completing the annual Affirmative Action Plan and EEO reports. James’ team were excellent to work with – patient, professional and very reliable. I would work with CRI again and recommend CRI to anyone needing assistance with an audit by OFCCP or needing assistance with an AAP.” Robert Leyh, HR at Tech Flow Inc

Denver Hotel Management Company To Pay $105,000 to Settle EEOC Sex Discrimination Suit

James Gutierrez — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 18:03:44 +0000

Courtesy of: EEOC

PRESS RELEASE
12-8-10

Company Denied Promotion to Single Mother Because of Her Children,

Federal Agency Charged

DENVER – The Denver Hotel Management Company (DHMC) will pay $105,000 to settle a sex discrimination case filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had charged that the company refused to promote a single mother because she had children.

According to the EEOC lawsuit, the woman was denied promotion to a newly created position of assistant human resource director because of her caregiver responsibilities as the mother of two young children, and the job was given to a less qualified and less experienced employee. The managers explained to the woman that she was being passed over for the job because of her role as a mother of young children, asserting that she could not relocate or work the required 50-60 hour work week because she “had a full-time job at home with her children,” the EEOC said. According to the EEOC’s complaint, the woman was never asked if she would be willing to relocate or work extended hours. Instead, the decision-makers assumed that because the complainant was the mother and primary caregiver for small children, she would be unwilling to relocate or work extended hours.

Discrimination based on stereotypical views of a woman’s caregiver status is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

DHMC has agreed to pay $105,000 to settle the case (EEOC v. Denver Hotel Management Company, Inc., Civ. No. 10-cv-01712-REB-BNB.) Under the consent decree settling the suit, DHMC also agreed to revamp its discrimination policies and conduct training for all of its employees to explain how stereotypes concerning a person’s family responsibilities can constitute illegal sex discrimination.

“Making assumptions about a woman’s ability to perform a job which are not grounded in fact, but instead on stereotyped assumptions about her inability to work long hours due to her child care responsibilities, is unlawful discrimination,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill. “The Supreme Court has acknowledged that there is a pervasive stereotype that caring for family members is ‘women's work,’ and that this stereotype remains firmly rooted in our society. The EEOC is committed to eliminating all forms of sex discrimination from the workplace.”

EEOC Phoenix District Office District Director Rayford Irvin added, “We are pleased with the initiatives that DHMC has agreed to in this settlement. We look forward to seeing its efforts to promote individuals into management positions without basing its decisions on illegal, stereotyped assumptions about a caregiver’s ability to balance the competing demands in that person’s life.”

Pharmacy Giant Omnicare Will Pay $195,000 Under Consent Decree Ending EEOC Sex Harassment Case

James Gutierrez — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 18:02:54 +0000

Courtesy of: EEOC

PRESS RELEASE
12-21-10

Women at La Crosse Pharmacy Endured Physical and Verbal Abuse, Agency Charged

MADISON, Wis. – Pharmacy giant Omnicare, Inc. will pay $195,000 to a class of five female sex discrimination victims under a consent decree entered by Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker on December 21, 2010 in federal court in the Western District of Wisconsin. The damages had been sought in a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC had charged that a class of women was subjected to sexual harassment at Omnicare’s Pinnacle Pharmacy in La Crosse, Wis.

According to the EEOC’s suit, a pharmacy manager engaged in repeated, egregious acts of sexual harassment toward female employees, such as unwelcome touching that included approaching female employees from behind and grinding his crotch on them, and making sexually explicit and demeaning comments to female employees. According to the EEOC, women complained about the manager’s behavior repeatedly, but no action was taken by Omnicare to put a stop to it.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful to harass employees based on sex, including sexual harassment, and prohibits retaliation against someone who complains about discrimination. The EEOC filed suit ( EEOC v. Omnicare, Inc. d/b/a Pinnacle Pharmacy, Case No. 10 cv 364) on June 30 in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

Under the terms of the two-year consent decree settling the suit, Omnicare will pay $195,000 to the class of five women. In addition to monetary damages, the decree provides for injunctive relief enjoining Omnicare from maintaining a sexually hostile work environment or engaging in retaliation. The decree also requires the company to distribute its policy against sexual harassment along with a confidential survey assessing the company’s complaint reporting system, provide annual sexual harassment training for employees, and provide periodic reports to the EEOC.

“One would think that if any workplace would be free ofegregious sexual harassment, it would be a workplace connected to health care — like a pharmacy,” said Regional Attorney John Hendrickson of the EEOC’s Chicago District. “But this case illustrates that when it comes to sexual harassment, our expectations are often out of order and that, in fact, no workplace is immune. That’s why we were in this case and why we insisted upon the terms of the consent decree entered by the court. We trust they will make a difference going forward.”

The case was litigated by Trial Attorney Camille Monahan of the EEOC’s Milwaukee Area Office. The EEOC’s Chicago District Office is responsible for processing charges of discrimination, administrative enforcement, and the conduct of agency litigation in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and North and South Dakota, with Area Offices in Milwaukee and Minneapolis.

According to company information, Covington, Ky.-based Omnicare is the nation's leading provider of pharmaceutical care for seniors. Each day, Omnicare pharmacists serve more than 1.4 million residents of skilled nursing, assisted living, and other healthcare facilities in 47 states and Canada.

Subway Operator to Pay $55,000 for Sexual Harassment Complaint

James Gutierrez — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 17:59:50 +0000

Courtesy of: EEOC

EEOC says Male Assistant Manager Sexually Harassed Female Employees

WILMINGTON, N.C. — SKMATCH, Inc., the operator of a Subway restaurant in Wilmington, N.C., will pay $55,000 and furnish other relief to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had charged that two female employees were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment at one of SKMATCH’s Subway restaurants in Wilmington.

According to the EEOC’s complaint, from around December 2008 through May 7, 2009, the male assistant manager at the Subway store where Helena Miller worked, subjected her to repeated sexual comments, sexual propositions and name calling and sexual touching. At the time of the sexual harassment, Miller was only 18 years old, and the assistant manager who harassed her was ten years older than her. Miller complained to other managers about the sexual harassment, the EEOC said, but no action was taken in response to her complaints. The harassment was so intolerable that Miller was forced to quit her job in order to avoid being harassed.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit case (EEOC v. SKMATCH, Inc. d/b/a Subway, Case No. 7:10CV00187) in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

In addition to the $55,000 in compensatory damages to be divided between Miller and a second victim, the five-year consent decree resolving the lawsuit includes injunctive relief that requires SKMATCH to (1) refrain from engaging in sexual harassment or retaliation; (2) revise its sexual harassment policy to include procedures for reporting and resolving sexual harassment complaints; (3) conduct anti-discrimination training; (4) post a notice about the settlement; (5) distribute its revised policies prohibiting sexual harassment; and (6) report certain complaints of harassment to the EEOC for monitoring.

“All workers have the right to work in an environment free from sexual harassment,” says Lynette Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Charlotte District, which includes the agency’s Raleigh Area Office, where the underlying charge of discrimination was filed. “No one should have to put up with sexual comments or touching in their place of work. Smart employers can prevent sexual harassment by training their employees on workplace harassment and how to report it, and training their managers on how to respond effectively to a sexual harassment complaint with a prompt investigation and effective corrective measures.”

2011 – What To Expect From The New OFCCP

James Gutierrez — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:02:34 +0000

As the 2010 Year comes to a close, we are seeing the new face of the OFCCP beginning to emerge. The rising clout of OFCCP began with a 35% increase to its staff, followed by the release of Director Patricia Shiu’s six year business plan for OFCCP. What we will see moving forward is the increased number of OFCCP audits, enforcement action, contractor debarment, and record financial penalties. Director Shiu is clearly keeping her promise that OFCCP is in a “Restore, transform and enforce” mode.

Debarment

As of October 31, 2010, 645 companies and over 5,000 individuals have been declared ineligible for federal contracts and subcontracts because they violated Executive Order 11246; Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 29 U.S.C. Sec. 793 ("Section 503"); and/or the affirmative action provisions of the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, as amended, 38 U.S.C. Sec. 4212 ("Section 4212"). OFCCP announced that this number will increase during 2011.

Outreach

OFCCP will aggressively measure the extent of a contractor’s outreach for job groups that are underutilized. Contractors that have a habit of delaying the preparation of their AAP will find that current audits will test outreach efforts vs. areas of underutilization. OFCCP will measure these outreach efforts to determine at what point they were put into place. Contractors that prepare their AAP months after the AAP start date will find it difficult to provide measurable outreach efforts for their entire AAP year, and will find themselves faced with a two year conciliation agreement which the CEO or President must sign off on. The conciliation agreement will involve recordkeeping requirements and will require additional follow up audits.

OFCCP will continue to focus on contractors’ outreach efforts to community based organizations, state employment agencies, and veterans groups.

Compensation

OFCCP will be more active in enforcing compensation cases involving federal contractors, including "glass ceiling" cases. OFCCP will be enforcing the rules not only for blue-collar and low wage-workers, but will also look at pay disparities at higher pay grades. Currently OFCCP is sending ALL compensation data collected during audits directly to the Department of Statisticians in hopes of uncovering not only systemic compensation issues but all pay disparities, no matter how small.

Note: OFCCP is expected to rescind the 2006 Interpretive Standards on Compensation Discrimination.

OFCCP Top Three Priorities

The top three OFCCP priorities include: strengthening enforcement, implementing a robust regulatory agenda, and broadening outreach to identify more individual complaints from workers.

1. Strengthen Enforcement

Increasing on-site investigations – OFCCP has stated that on-site audits will no longer be the exception but rather the norm.

OFCCP will be more aggressive in how they resolve cases by:

Moving from “good faith” to accountability measures
Improving make-whole remedies for affected workers
Pursuing litigation, debarment, and other sanctions with worst offenders

2. OFCCP Regulatory Agenda

VEVRAA – Veterans

Will publish new rules next winter
Will require federal contractors and subcontractors to strengthen AAP’s and measure their EEO efforts

Section 503 – Individuals with Disabilities

Seek public input on key questions around

o Effective employment practices

o Available data

o Ways to strengthen linkage agreements

Construction – Women and Minorities

Increase hiring of women and minorities in construction jobs
Enhance effectiveness of construction contractors’ AAP’s, especially around recruitment, training and apprenticeships

Pay Equity – Women

Develop new compensation data collection instrument
Rescind 2006 Interpretive Standards on Compensation Discrimination
Improve coordination with sister federal agencies on this issue

3. Broaden Outreach Efforts

Goal: to prioritize and increase individual complaints
Individual complaints yield more than double the rate of discrimination findings vs. neutral scheduling process
Increase community-based outreach to civil and workers’ rights groups and to advocacy and service-providing organizations
Engage acquisition officers across federal agencies
Focus on diversity in hiring on construction and ARRA projects
Play a leadership role on the President’s National Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force
Represent the U.S. Department of Labor on White House Initiative on Asian American and Pacific Islanders Federal Interagency Working Group
Under the leadership of President Barack Obama, the agency’s staff has grown by 35% and its budget has increased by 25%.

OFCCP By the Numbers

Network of 6 regional and 45 district and area offices
Team of 782 employees including almost 200 newly hired compliance officers
Evaluate more than 7,500 establishments annually
Just completed more than 450 audits of companies receiving contracts under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
Referred more than 34 cases to the Solicitor of Labor for litigation in FY 2010 – more than double from 2009 and triple from 2008

Examples of Recent Cases

Tyson Fresh Meats (Joslin, IL)

Largest supplier of premium beef and pork
Found discrimination against women in entry level jobs
Request back pay for more than 750 rejected applicants and offers of employment for more than 100 affected women

Coca-Cola Bottling Company (Charlotte, NC)

Second largest Coke bottler in the nation
Negotiated $495,000 in back wages and interest for 95 African-American and Hispanic job seekers and offers of employment for at least 23 class members
Settlement also includes restoring seniority and benefits to those who are hired – retroactive to 2002

High Court To Hear Wal-Mart Discrimination Case

James Gutierrez — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:37:49 +0000

by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider whether to keep alive the largest employment discrimination lawsuit in U.S. history, a case that claims Wal-Mart pays women less than men and promotes women less frequently.

The justices stepped into a dispute that could involve billions of dollars in back pay for 500,000 to 1.5 million women who work or once worked at Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest private employer. But the case also could affect other class-action lawsuits, in which people with similar interests increase their leverage by joining together in a single claim.

Wal-Mart, backed by many business interests, praised the court's intervention.

"The current confusion in class action law is harmful for everyone — employers, employees, businesses of all types and sizes, and the civil justice system," the company said in a statement. "These are exceedingly important issues that reach far beyond this particular case."

Wal-Mart, based in Bentonville, Ark., is appealing a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco that the class-action lawsuit could go to trial.
The company says that allowing the large number of claims to go forward would set off an avalanche of similar class-action lawsuits in California and the other Western states overseen by the 9th Circuit.

But the lawyers representing the women who are suing Wal-Mart say there have been only eight such suits nationwide – and none within the 9th Circuit – since the first appeals court ruling in favor of the women nearly four years ago.

"This threatened landslide of class-action litigation has not materialized," the lawyers said in legal papers filed with the Supreme Court.

Wal-Mart employs 1.4 million people in the United States and 2.1 million workers in 8,000 stores worldwide. The company said the women should not be allowed to join together in the lawsuit because each outlet operates as an independent business. Since it doesn't have a companywide policy of discrimination,

Wal-Mart argued that women alleging gender bias should file individual lawsuits against individual stores.

The plaintiffs contend that the company was aware that it lagged behind other employers in terms of opportunities for women and that Wal-Mart imposes uniform rules and tight controls over its stores.

The lawsuit was first filed by six women in federal court in 2001. The 9th Circuit has three times ruled that the case could proceed as a class action.

In its latest decision, in April, the appeals court voted 6-5 in favor of the plaintiffs. Judge Michael Daly Hawkins said that the number of women involved is large, but "mere size does not render a case unmanageable."

Judge Sandra Ikuta's blistering dissent said the women employees failed to present proof of widespread discrimination. Without such evidence, Ikuta said, "there is nothing to bind these purported 1.5 million claims together in a single action."

Federal Contractors Must Post Notices That Advise Employees of Their Rights to Unionize or Participate in Unions

James Gutierrez — Mon, 24 May 2010 22:30:49 +0000

Beginning on June 19, 2010 Federal contractors and their subcontractors are required to post notices informing employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). On June 3, 2010, Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) will present a webinar for Federal contractors and subcontractors to provide them with information about how to comply with this new regulation. For more information about the webinar subscribe to OFCCP's E-mail updates at http://www.dol.gov/OFCCP/.

These regulations implement Executive Order 13496, signed by President Obama on January 30, 2009, and require federal contractors to agree to post the required employee notice and to agree to insert provisions in their subcontracts that require their subcontractors to post the employee notice as well. The employee notice that must be posted and the contract provisions that must be inserted into Federal contracts and subcontracts can be found at 29 C.F.R. Part 471 Appendix A.

The notice to employees, required by the new regulation, informs employees about their rights under the NLRA to form, join and assist a union, and to bargain collectively with their employer. The notice provides examples of unlawful employer and union conduct that interferes with those rights and indicates how employees can contact the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal agency that enforces those rights, with questions or to file complaints. Contractors that violate the Labor Department's regulations requiring employee notification of these rights may be subject to sanctions, including suspension or cancelation of the contract.

Contractors and subcontractors must post the employee notice conspicuously in and around their plants and offices so that it is prominent and readily seen by employees who are covered by the NLRA and who engage in contract-related activity. In particular, contractors and subcontractors must post the notice where other notices to employees about their jobs are posted. Contractors and subcontractors who post notices to employees electronically must also post the required notice electronically, which requires posting a link to the Department of Labor's website containing the employee notice where they customarily place other electronic notices to employees about their jobs. Where a significant portion of contractor's workforce is not proficient in English, contractors and subcontractors must provide the employee notice in languages spoken by employees, and the Department will provide translations of the employee notice that can be used to comply with the physical and electronic posting requirements.

Contractors and subcontractors may obtain the required poster in any of three ways. The Labor Department will print posters and provide them to Federal contracting departments and agencies for supply to contractors and subcontractors. Contractors and subcontractors can request posters from the Labor Department's Office of Labor-Management Standards and OFCCP field offices, and contractors and subcontractors can download the poster from http://www.olms.dol.gov.

Ninth Circuit Panel Again Upholds Granting of Class Action Status to Wal-Mart Female Workers

James Gutierrez — Mon, 24 May 2010 22:08:42 +0000

by Caroline Gentry

Porter Wright Morris & Arthur

In an unusual procedural move, a Ninth Circuit panel issued a revised opinion and rejected—for the second time—Wal-Mart’s request to overrule a lower court decision granting class action status to a lawsuit by six women representing a class of more than 1.5 million female workers. Dukes v. Wal-Mart, Inc., Case Nos. 04-16688 and 04-16720, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 28551 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2007). The class includes all female workers—from part-time, entry-level hourly employees to full-time, salaried managers—at Wal-Mart stores from December 1998 to the present “who have been or may be subjected to Wal-Mart’s challenged pay and management track promotions, policies and practices.” The lawsuit alleges that female employees were paid less than men and given fewer promotions. If the case proceeds, it will be the largest sex discrimination case in U.S. history. The revised opinion addresses some of the criticisms directed toward the earlier opinion and changes some of the reasoning, though not the result, of the court’s earlier decision.

After initially finding that the size of the putative class was sufficient to justify a class action, the Court, deleted multiple passages from its earlier decision in an apparent attempt to correct some of its more questionable portions relating to the commonality of the factual and legal issues raised by the potential class members. In particular, the court retreated from its watered-down standard for expert testimony at the class certification stage and from its outright rejection of Wal-Mart’s statistical expert under that standard. Instead, the court simply stated that it need not consider whether the testimony of Wal-Mart’s statistical expert was more persuasive than that of Plaintiffs’ expert.

In another move that is particularly troubling for employers, the court maintained its position that commonality existed because of Wal-Mart’s use of subjective decision-making with regard to pay and promotion decisions. The court held that decentralized, subjective decision-making in and of itself can give rise to an inference of discrimination.

The court also reaffirmed its earlier holding that Plaintiffs could certify the class under the relaxed standards of Rule 23(b)(2) and need not satisfy the more demanding requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Plaintiffs claimed they should be allowed to certify the proposed class as one seeking injunctive and declaratory relief under Rule 23(b)(2) even though they sought billions of dollars in back pay and punitive damages. The general rule is that, in order to pursue a 23(b)(2) class action, monetary damages must not be the predominant relief sought and must be merely secondary to claims for injunctive relief. Wal-Mart argued that Plaintiffs should be required to establish predominance and superiority under Rule 23(b)(3) because of the large damages sought by the class. The Court rejected this argument, holding that the large damages sought were merely a function of the size of Wal-Mart itself and did not mean that damages were the class’s primary goal in instituting the action. The court chose to credit Plaintiffs’ self-serving statements that the primary goal of the litigation was to obtain an injunction against future discrimination—not monetary relief – even though some of the class members were no longer employed and would not benefit from such an injunction. The court added new language to its opinion recognizing that Wal-Mart correctly argued that a request for back pay did “weigh against” class certification but nonetheless held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by certifying the class under Rule 23(b)(2) notwithstanding the request. In so doing, the court deleted language from its earlier opinion that flatly rejected Wal-Mart’s contention that former employees had no interest in injunctive or declaratory relief. Instead, the court added language agreeing with Wal-Mart’s argument and holding that class certification “may not be proper” for former employees.

Finally, in its prior opinion, the court rejected Wal-Mart’s argument that the size of the class made a trial unmanageable because Wal-Mart would not be able to conduct individualized hearings on the merits of each claim and raise defenses unique to each individual class member without incurring prohibitive expense. Instead, the court held that Wal-Mart was not entitled to individualized hearings either under existing precedent or due process, a holding that appeared to contradict not only the Supreme Court’s decision in Int’l Bd. of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324 (1977), but also Title VII and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. In so doing, the court endorsed Plaintiffs’ plan to use statistical methods to determine liability and award back pay and punitive damages for each class member. In its revised opinion, the court deleted the language describing these holdings and instead “express[ed] no opinion regarding Wal-Mart’s objections to the district court’s tentative trial plan.”

Following issuance of the court’s revised opinion, Wal-Mart again requested an en banc review of the court’s decision on class certification. Wal-Mart’s petition for review argues that the class was improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(2) and that the proposed class “presents intractable manageability problems.”

Employers should take note of this case as it makes its way through the court system. The case raises a number of critical legal issues including, among others: (1) whether courts can or should rigorously review expert testimony at the class certification stage; (2) whether decisions based on subjective criteria are susceptible to a finding of commonality under Rule 23; (3) whether defendants can offer individualized defenses as to whether particular class members were discriminated against; and (4) whether plaintiffs can sidestep the demanding Rule 23(b)(3) requirements of predominance and superiority by using Rule 23(b)(2) even in cases seeking massive damages. This case is also significant because of the size of the class and the potential damages involved. It could establish a new framework that would allow classes of employees nationwide to file lawsuits against their employers alleging that a uniform policy or corporate culture, combined with subjective decisions by individual managers, resulted in discrimination. For these reasons, employment lawyers and their clients are waiting and watching to see what happens next.

OFCCP Toughens Audits and Unveils Six Year Strategic Business Plan

James Gutierrez — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 04:10:51 +0000

It is by now conventional wisdom that the OFCCP is stepping up enforcement activities that will generate record breaking financial remedies for affected females and minorities which will impact all federal contractors.

This past week Patricia Shiu, Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs outlined a draft of the agencies Strategic Business Plan which lays out the direction of OFCCP through 2016. Director Shiu stated that “it is a new day at OFCCP” and made it quite clear that this administration and the OFCCP’s Strategic Plan’s goal is to engage federal contractors with new burdensome processes to demonstrate compliance.

The Strategic Business Plan laid out two primary goals as follows;

Prepare workers for good jobs and ensure fair compensation. In order to meet this portion of the Strategic Business Plan OFCCP looks to:

a. Increase workers’ incomes and narrow wage and income inequity; and
b. Help workers who are out of the labor market or in low-wage jobs find a path into middle class jobs.

2. Assure fair and high-quality work-life environments. In order to meet this portion of the Strategic Business Plan OFCCP looks to:

a. Break down barriers to a fair and diverse workplace so that every worker’s contribution is respected; and
b. Ensure workers have a voice in the workplace.

Contractors can expect an increased scrutiny of their compensation systems. In the past years we have seen OFCCP audits focus on systemic pay discrimination. Future audits will focus on both systemic and individual pay disparities. The message here is that contractors must get very serious about conducting meaningful analysis and proactively implementing pay adjustments were unjustified pay disparities exist. These adjustments need to begin now as OFCCP, as part of their audit process, intends to request compliance documentation that includes evidence of “self-audits” and the corrective process used to remedy pay issues. This could include proof of back pay and make whole relief to the affected individuals.

The draft of the Strategic Business Plan clearly outlines the agencies increased focus on a contractors’ selection process and emphasis on outreach to an hiring, promoting and training veterans and individuals with disabilities.

The strategic plan also outlines the agencies intent to conduct corporate wide multi-establishment audits. Though it is not clear as to how these reviews will be conducted, it will increase the burden of these multi-establishment entities to prepare for several audits at the same time.

Adding to their enhanced presence, the OFCCP will reincarnate the EO Survey, though not in its original form. The new version will be used to enhance the current targeting method used by OFCCP.

Of importance is the OFCCP new focus on repeat offenders. Contractors that have been found to be non-compliant will be faced with follow-up evaluations that will be designed to ensure the implementation of corrective policies and procedures. Contractors that have had negative findings during the audit process will be faced with more rigorous reviews during their conciliation progress reporting periods and all future audits.

To better prepare you for what an audit may look like under the Directorship of Patricia Shiu, join our webinar on April 27th at 10:00 AM PDT or May 5, 2010 at 10 AM PDT

Research Shows That An Increasing Number of U.S. Workers Are Retiring To Mexico

James Gutierrez — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 02:04:12 +0000

A recent study concludes that many Baby Boomers leaving the workforce will retire in Mexico. According to the US Department of State, over four million Americans now live in Mexico with tens of thousands of Americans crossing the boarder each year. Statistics show that the primary reason for Americans retiring in Mexico is the current recession and loss of investment income.

With a down economy, layoffs and a bleak economic future for employees, many companies are providing “retirement counseling” in order to assist employees leaving the workforce with positive change of life options, and these include information on retiring in Mexico.

Mexico cost of living allows retirees to stretch their pension and investment money. Additional reasons include better climate, a higher standard of living and access to health services that cost up to 12 times less than those in the United States.

The health Insurance Industry is acting upon this significant trend. Already, the four largest commercial U.S. health insurers—with enrollments totaling nearly 100 million people—have either launched pilot programs exploring or offering overseas travel to countries like Mexico for health services. Some smaller health insurers and brokers also have introduced travel options for hundreds of employers around the country.

It also makes sense that Americans should be able to use insurance benefits from Medicare and Medicaid in Mexico. And that ability may become reality very soon, says Bruno Ferrari, the chief executive officer of Promexico, Mexico’s foreign investment agency.

And he believes that within one year, the governments of Mexico and the U.S. may have an agreement to let Americans use their Medicare and Medicaid insurance at Mexican health care facilities.

Already, 10 U.S. and Canadian companies have expressed an interest in building facilities to cater to Americans seeking to take advantage of low medical expenses, he says. This is all good news for those who live in Mexico and for anyone thinking about relocating or retiring there.

Anticipating the approval of both U.S. private insurance and Medicare/Medicaid programs in Mexico, real estate developers are getting in on the act, too. Many of them are creating special communities that cater to the health needs of foreign retirees, including assisted living centers.

The biggest boom will be the development of “green communities”. Already one U.S. based developer, (Rancho Costa Verde www.ranchocostaverde.com) located in San Diego, California, is in there second phase of developing a “green community” that is located just two hours south of the U.S., Mexican border on the Sea of Cortez.

Frank Ingrande, President of Rancho Coasta Verde, shared with us a few facts about the community.

350-acre master planned community that offers breathtaking 180-degree sea and mountain views from every home site.
1/4-acre home sites start as low as $17,500.00. Rancho Costa Verde offers secure ownership with title insurance provided by Stewart Title.
All properties are either ocean front or have full ocean views
80 percent of home construction material is made from recycled material
Homes are powered by renewable energy solar and/or wind
Homes have waste water treatment systems that recycle all water for irrigation
Homes use an atmospheric water maker that produces purified drinking water from the humidity in the air with power produced by the sun.
Homes sell for a fraction of what they cost in the United States and Canada.

When asked if you can own property in Mexico, Frank responded, “Yes, you can legally own property in Mexico — including beachfront. Foreigners can legally own property in Mexico, and the Mexican legal system protects the rights of foreign property owners. That means you can enjoy owning the kinds of property in Mexico that might be priced out of your budget in the US – including beachfront and beach view property. Mexico’s Foreign Investment Act, allowing foreigners to own beachfront property, was passed in 1994 with the North America Free Trade Agreement.

We produced a 15 minute DVD and created comprehensive printed material that explain all of this because many people are not aware of these facts. Anyone interested can receive our DVD and printed material for free by calling our office at 1-866-464-0243 or by requesting the information through our website at www.ranchocostaverde.com. We also have weekend discovery visits by luxury motorcoach that depart from San Diego Saturday mornings and return Sunday evenings for people that would like to visit Rancho Costa Verde and the surrounding area."

Some additional facts that Frank shared with us are:

According to U.S. government figures, Mexico's economy moved ahead of Canada's last year, making it the 12th largest economy in the world.
Unlike the U.S., Mexico is one of the world's largest oil exporters and sells 1.7 billion barrels of oil to the U.S. each day. As a result, Mexico's economy is actually strengthened by today's rising oil prices.
Mexico's stock market has also taken off. In fact, over the past five years, Mexican markets have outperformed U.S. stocks (as measured by the S&P500) by 10 to 1.
Mexico's government has launched a 5-year, $250 billion program to build new highways, railways, airports and ports throughout the country, much of that in Baja.
And today, there are countless state-of-the-art hospitals and care homes being built specifically to service the aging baby boomers arriving from north of the border.

To receive additional information on retiring in Mexico or the Rancho Costa Verde Project call 1-866-464-0243 or visit www.ranchocostaverde.com.

Workplace grief costs U.S businesses over $75 billion per year in reduced productivity

James Gutierrez — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:59:01 +0000

Support for grieving employees makes a difference

BY CINDY KRISCHER GOODMAN

cgoodman@MiamiHerald.com

Free Webinar On Grief In The Workplace

Workplace grief costs U.S. businesses over $75 billion per year in reduced productivity, increased errors and accidents, according to the Wall Street Journal. Yet, how employers react to a worker's loss can make or break how workers feel about their jobs. Experiencing compassion at work can change the way people see the entire organization.

Indeed, many companies don't handle workplace grief all that well. Tears at the office don't always go over. Some managers find it downright disruptive, especially if it drags on for months. Often, like so many other things in a work environment, it boils down to the integrity of the person you work for, your direct boss.

The key, initially, is acknowledging a loss, says Ligia Houben, a certified grief counselor and author of Transform Your Loss. “Managers really shouldn't go on like nothing has happened.'' Yet, a friendly “How are you?'' may inevitably lead to an outpouring of emotions or resentment at the question.

Houben says the better way is to say, “If you need me, I am here for you.'' She believes a positive workplace experience can help. “If the boss and co-workers can show understanding and solidarity, the person will feel in a better place.''

As an employer, a challenge is that individual workers react to loss differently. Some prefer to come to work. Others want to cope with a loss in private.

Claudine Sada, a Creole translator with Miami-Dade County, feels fortunate to have a supportive workplace to go to, rather than sitting home alone crying over the loss of family and friends in Haiti. Initially, a boss may need to reduce an employee's workload. Sada's supervisor temporarily has shifted some of her responsibilities. “They accepted the fact that I couldn't function well.''

Colleagues have been considerate in ways she never could have expected. They have bought her lunch each day. They have given her envelopes of cash to buy medicine to send to sick relatives. County Commissioners have helped her get her nephew from Haiti enrolled in public school in Miami. “They have made me feel like they are my second family,'' says Sada, a 10-year county employee.

Less friendly workplaces may not tolerate time off for funerals. Bereavement leave is not required by the Fair Labor Standards Act or the Family and Medical Leave Act. Many small businesses offer no paid leave.

At least initially, showing concern needs to take precedence over worker productivity, says Miami-Dade County HR director Angela Maher.

“There's a lot of stress in the workforce, everyone is trying to do more with less. It's easy for managers to get caught up in mission and goals of organization and not be as compassionate with employees as they should be''

Creating a compassionate workplace had been on the agenda at Jackson Health System even before the Haiti disaster. In December, Houben, the author and grief counselor, had conducted a seminar at Jackson on coping with workplace grief. The message: encourage communication and let the bereaved express their feelings.

“I'm roaming the halls and giving workers permission to cry,'' said the Rev. Patricia Wilson, director of the Jackson's pastoral care services.

Clearly, outreach and sensitivity during an employee's time of grief set a positive tone for everyone in your workplace. Cruise line giant Royal Caribbean jumped into action when learning of the Haiti disaster; about 200 crew members on its ships are Haitian.

Immediately after the earthquake, Royal Caribbean gave employees phone cards to help them get in touch with family members and it installed Skype on all its ships, said communications director Cynthia Martinez.

It also sent grief counselors onto ships and encouraged phone-in sessions. For crew who wanted to go home to Haiti, the cruise line coordinated travel for them and offered “compassion leave,'' for as long as needed.

Even more, it advanced funds to those who couldn't afford to take time off, Martinez says. “Many of our employees, even those who weren't affected, have told us they are extremely appreciative.''

Send your comments and ideas to Cindy Krischer Goodman at cgoodman @MiamiHerald.com.

Join our Free Webinar on April 29, 2010

The Growing Impact of Grief Illiteracy in the Workplace

Featured Products

James Gutierrez — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:28:05 +0000

Sexual Harassment Prevention

Online Training For Managers

$35 Per-seat. Our program takes a common sense approach to sexual harassment training and teaches both managers and employees to spot and avoid problem behaviors. It meets all state requirements and features the same functionality you'll find in programs that cost $60 to $70 per seat. Best of all you can order online without sitting through a lengthy sales call or signing a multi-year contract.

Why you should train your entire staff:

Meet the requirements of the EEOC guidelines
Increase global corporate awareness of sexual harassment issues within the workplace
Is statistically proven to decrease the likelihood of an incident
Mitigates liability in the event of a lawsuit

Supervisor/Employee Functions:

Highly interactive
Caselaw and definitions
Examples and real-life scenarios
Progress tracking and scoring
Bookmarking
Interactive menus
Quick Quizzes and Module Exams
Forums for questions and comments
Links to additional information and resources
Course completion Certificate for audit purposes

The $7 Billion Tax Dodge

James Gutierrez — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:01:49 +0000

President Obama’s 2010 budget assumes that the federal crackdown will yield at least $7 billion over 10 years. More than two dozen states also have stepped up enforcement, often by enacting stricter penalties for misclassifying workers.

Many workplace experts say a growing number of companies have maneuvered to cut costs by wrongly classifying regular employees as independent contractors, though they often are given desks, phone lines and assignments just like regular employees. Moreover, the experts say, workers have become more reluctant to challenge such practices, given the tough job market.

Companies that pass off employees as independent contractors avoid paying Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes for those workers. Companies do not withhold income taxes from contractors’ paychecks, and several studies have indicated that, on average, misclassified independent workers do not report 30 percent of their income.

One federal study concluded that employers illegally passed off 3.4 million regular workers as contractors, while the Labor Department estimates that up to 30 percent of companies misclassify employees. Ohio’s attorney general estimates that his state has 92,500 misclassified workers, which has cost the state up to $35 million a year in unemployment insurance taxes, up to $103 million in workers’ compensation premiums and up to $223 million in income tax revenue.

“It’s a very significant problem,” said the attorney general, Richard Cordray. “Misclassification is bad for business, government and labor. Law-abiding businesses are in many ways the biggest fans of increased enforcement. Misclassifying can mean a 20 or 30 percent cost difference per worker.”

Employers deny misclassifying workers deliberately. The businesses say the lines are unclear between employee and independent contractor.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com …

Les Schwab Tire Centers Agrees To Pay $2,000,000 To Settle Hiring Discrimination Case Involving Females

James Gutierrez — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:00:26 +0000

Les Schwab Tire Centers Agrees To Pay $2,000,000 To Settle Hiring Discrimination Case Involving Females

SEATTLE — The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced today that it has resolved its gender-based hiring class lawsuit against Les Schwab Tire Centers of Washington, et al., and Les Schwab Tire Warehouse, Inc. for $2,000,000 and other corrective measures. The EEOC's suit (Case No. 06-045-RSM) in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle) claimed that Les Schwab had failed to hire qualified women for Sales & Service (tire changing) jobs at its stores in Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Utah starting in 2004. "While the parties have engaged in extensive litigation the past four years, we are pleased to work with Les Schwab to bring this case to a resolution and to start a new era of cooperation," EEOC Regional Attorney William Tamayo said. "This resolution allows Les Schwab and the women who the EEOC represents to move forward." Mike Baldonado, EEOC San Francisco District Director, whose responsibility includes Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, stated, "The EEOC will continue to investigate employers and industries that have put women in certain types of jobs, and men in others. We hope Les Schwab becomes a model employer of women in the male-dominated tire industry." In addition to the monetary amount, Les Schwab agrees to maintain its anti-discrimination policies and procedures and anti-discrimination training for all its managers, assistant managers and employees about Title VII and sex-based discrimination. The company will also provide periodic reports to the EEOC on its compliance with the terms of the consent decree.

The $7 Billion Tax Dodge

New York Times ^ | February 18, 2010 | Steven Greenhouse Federal and state officials, many facing record budget deficits, are starting to aggressively pursue companies that try to pass off regular employees as independent contractors. President Obama’s 2010 budget assumes that the federal crackdown will yield at least $7 billion over 10 years. More than two dozen states also have stepped up enforcement, often by enacting stricter penalties for misclassifying workers. Many workplace experts say a growing number of companies have maneuvered to cut costs by wrongly classifying regular employees as independent contractors, though they often are given desks, phone lines and assignments just like regular employees. Moreover, the experts say, workers have become more reluctant to challenge such practices, given the tough job market. Companies that pass off employees as independent contractors avoid paying Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes for those workers. Companies do not withhold income taxes from contractors’ paychecks, and several studies have indicated that, on average, misclassified independent workers do not report 30 percent of their income. One federal study concluded that employers illegally passed off 3.4 million regular workers as contractors, while the Labor Department estimates that up to 30 percent of companies misclassify employees. Ohio’s attorney general estimates that his state has 92,500 misclassified workers, which has cost the state up to $35 million a year in unemployment insurance taxes, up to $103 million in workers’ compensation premiums and up to $223 million in income tax revenue. “It’s a very significant problem,” said the attorney general, Richard Cordray. “Misclassification is bad for business, government and labor. Law-abiding businesses are in many ways the biggest fans of increased enforcement. Misclassifying can mean a 20 or 30 percent cost difference per worker.” Employers deny misclassifying workers deliberately. The businesses say the lines are unclear between employee and independent contractor. (Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com …

Affirmative Action Plans and EEO Support

James Gutierrez — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 07:30:33 +0000

Affirmative Action Consultant

If you’re reading this, there’s a good chance you are looking for the development of an Affirmative Action Plan (AAP), Affirmative Action Audit Support, Assistance with OFCCP issues, Availability Analysis, Impact Ratio Analysis, Responding to an OFCCP Audit, EEO or an Affirmative Action Consultant for your organization. We’d be happy to help you with your objectives, your corporate initiatives and assisting you reach your immediate and long term Affirmative Action Plan (AAP), EEO and Diversity goals.

Career Resources is a leading provider of corporate critical Affirmative Action and Equal Employment Opportunity needs. We have over 31 years of experience working with hundreds of HR Leaders in over 40 states.

Company Overview:

31 years experience as a nationally recognized Affirmative Action consultancy.
Assisted hundreds of companies nationwide.
Over 400,000+ Human Resource Professionals receive our monthly newsletter.
Rated by the National Association of Human Resource Professionals as the #1 Affirmative Action Consultant 8 years in a row.
Past Federal Contract Compliance Officers on our Staff
An expert legal team
A team of passionate and dedicated staff to help you meet your needs.

* First Name:
* Last Name:
* Company Name:
* City:
* State:
*Postal/Zip Code:
* Phone:
* Your Email Address:
* Website:
Services that you would like CRI to refer to you:
* CRI Services you are interested in promoting:	Affirmative Action Plan Development Sexual Harassment Training for Managers Sexual Harassment Training for Employees
* Preferred Email Format: