Tag Archives: hiring

Federal Contractors and Subcontractors Top 10 Affirmative Action Checklist

Contributed by Heather Bailey

Any federal government contractor or subcontractor can testify to how much work really goes into complying with Affirmative Action obligations. Here is just a quick, non-exhaustive checklist to highlight many of your affirmative action to-dos:

  1. Are you “listing” your job openings with the nearby unemployment agencies?
  2. Are you asking your job applicants to self-identify their gender, race, veteran status and whether they are disabled or not?
  3. Are you asking those individuals that you have given an offer of employment to self-identify again their veteran status and whether they are disabled or not?
  4. Did you perform your annual compensation review to determine any pay disparities among employees in the same job groups and titles?
  5. Did you file your EEO-1?
  6. Did you file your VETS-4212 form?
  7. Did you update and post your affirmative action policy statement for employees and applicants to see?
  8. Did you have a refresher course with management and those employees in charge of hiring on the importance of affirmative action and their obligations in hiring and managing the workforce?
  9. If you are a contractor who hires subs to work on federal government work, did you include the requisite EEO and affirmative action compliance language in your agreement with your sub?
  10. Did you update your annual affirmative action plan?

It’s best to seek guidance from your employment labor counsel to ensure you are in compliance with all affirmative action requirements. Waiting until the OFCCP audit letter comes may be too late.

Don’t Set Up Employee to Fail: Internal Email Precludes Summary Judgment for Employer in Age Discrimination Case

Contributed by Terry Fox

Employers are frequently faced with challenging terminations, often because they perceive a threat of litigation from the terminated employee.  Supervisors in these situations normally interact closely with human resources professionals.  In these instances, email communication should be closely monitored so as not to raise an inference of improper focus on the employee. 

In Phillips v. StellarOne Bank, Ca.No. 7:11-cv-oo440 (7/16/12 W.D. Va.), the human resources professional involved did not pay close attention to her choice of words.  As a result, the employer was denied early exit from the federal age discrimination and FMLA lawsuit, instead facing a jury trial.  In this case, a 51-year-old employee, Phillips, fell out of favor with his supervisor, apparently based on performance issues.  His supervisor gave him a negative performance evaluation in 2009 and put him on an improvement plan. 

Phillips’ supervisor vetted the proposed performance improvement plan with the company’s human resources department.  The response was transmitted via an email that became central to the lawsuit.  The email stated:

“There is a lot of room for him [Phillips] to “trip up” after this warning considering all the areas where he is below expectation and the magnitude of improvement needed.  I recommend that you consider how strict you are going to be on this (i.e., zero tolerance the next time he does not provide a timely report) and communicate accordingly so that he knows this is a true warning – and that his job is truly on the line.”

The author of this email testified that she assumed “trip up” meant setting performance goals so that Phillips couldn’t meet them.  The court found that a jury could conclude that this email, alone or with other evidence, proved the employee was meeting his employer’s legitimate expectation and that age and/or scheduled FMLA leave was the true reason for the termination.

While certainly no employee should be set up to fail, in challenging terminations where litigation is a strong likelihood, employers may want to consult competent counsel to vett the many issues involved.