EEOC: Car dealership segregated employees by sex, retaliated against HR workers who intervened

Take heed to the article
3 min

This audio is auto-generated. Please tell us you probably have suggestions.

Dive Temporary:

• A automotive dealership in Independence, Missouri, refused to rent girls for gross sales positions or males for cashier, clerical or different workplace positions, based on a lawsuit filed Tuesday by the U.S. Equal Employment Alternative Fee (EEOC v. Landmark Dodge Inc. and Landmark South Inc., No. 4:22-cv-614 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 27, 2022)). When an HR director and recruiter knowledgeable the overall supervisor this was unlawful and tried to intervene, he yelled at them, known as them “liars,” and threatened them with termination, based on the grievance.  
• Per the EEOC, the dealership allegedly refused to rent girls for gross sales roles as a result of they “don’t get the respect obligatory to achieve success at automotive gross sales,” “find yourself quitting as a result of it isn’t a ‘clerical job,’” and “sit at their desks.” A gross sales supervisor refused to satisfy a feminine interview applicant due to her intercourse, EEOC mentioned. The corporate additionally steered males away from workplace roles and instructed one male applicant the job he utilized for was a “lady’s place.” 
• “There isn’t a justification for sex-segregated workplaces,” mentioned David Davis, performing director of the EEOC’s St. Louis District Workplace, in a launch from the company. “Sadly, retaliation in opposition to staff who oppose discriminatory employment practices stays a persistent downside.”

Dive Perception:

This specific case reveals how HR professionals typically discover themselves caught between employer calls for and authorized necessities.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids employers from discriminating in hiring and different employment choices on the premise of intercourse, amongst different protected courses. Primarily based on the EEOC’s grievance, the HR staff have been doubtless accustomed to this statute. 

Compliance-aware HR professionals have additionally taken steps that defend their employers from legal responsibility, as within the case of an HR division that rapidly addressed a harassment grievance by way of an investigation. As a result of division’s immediate motion, the employer couldn’t be held answerable for harassment, the seventh U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals held. 

Insisting on adherence to the regulation can typically create awkward conditions for HR, however not doing so may be pricey and damaging. Activision Blizzard realized this lesson final yr, when the California Division of Truthful Employment and Housing held the corporate accountable for “foster[ing] a sexist tradition,” together with paying girls decrease salaries, assigning them to lower-level roles and tolerating prevalent sexual harassment. Based on sources who spoke to HR Dive final yr, that tradition was enabled by a lax, and typically negligent, HR division. The corporate ultimately settled an EEOC swimsuit involving related allegations for $18 million. 

Whereas HR has struggled with reputational points almost because the division’s inception, HR Dive present in its annual Id of HR survey that these within the division are starting to really feel extra valued by workers. Defending staff’ rights — typically by way of information of the regulation’s necessities — could also be one technique to flip the reputational tide.