Occupational concentration in work establishments

The failure of sociological and economic models premised on individual decision-making to account for persistent patterns of occupational concentration by race and gender has been a matter of considerable recent interest and debate. One response to this debate has been to explore the impact of various organizational dimensions on the social division of labor as experienced by males and females and/or blacks and whites. The importance of the work place as a locus of occupational restrictions has been widely acknowledged, but empirical research on this topic has been limited by the availability of establishment-level data. This paper seeks to contribute to our understanding of occupational concentration by race and gender through analysis of 1980 EEOC data on business establishments. The first phase of analysis examines the importance of the work place for occupational concentration by race and gender and places the EEOC data within the context of the 1980 U.S. economy. The second phase of analysis explores the impact of several organizational characteristics on occupational concentration within work establishments.     

Workplace discrimination and HIV/AIDS: the national EEOC ADA research project

This article utilizes data from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Integrated Mission System database to document the levels of employment discrimination involving individuals with HIV/AIDS. The researchers explore the theory that the nature of HIV/AIDS related employment discrimination is rooted in deeper stigmatization than discrimination against other disability groups. Researchers compare and contrast key demographic characteristics of Charging Parties and Respondents involved in HIV/AIDS related allegations of discrimination and their proportion of EEOC merit resolutions to those of persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Findings indicate that, in contrast to the general disability group, HIV/AIDS was more likely to be male, ethnic minorities, between the ages of 25-44, in white collar jobs, in the South and West and to work for businesses with 15 to 100 employees. Additionally, the allegations in HIV/AIDS were more likely to receive merit resolution from the EEOC by a large difference of ten percent.     

The context of discrimination: workplace conditions, institutional environments, and sex and race discrimination charges

This article explores the organizational conditions under which discrimination charges occur. Drawing on structural and organizational theories of the workplace, the authors demonstrate how organizational conditions affect workers' and regulatory agents' understandings of unlawful discrimination. Using a national sample of work establishments, matched to discrimination-charge data obtained from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the authors examine how characteristics of the workplace and institutional environment affect variation in the incidence of workers' charges of sex and race discrimination and in the subset of discrimination claims that are verified by EEOC investigators. The findings indicate that workplace conditions, including size, composition, and minority management, affect workers' charges as well as verified claims; the latter are also affected by institutional factors, such as affirmative action requirements, subsidiary status, and industrial sector. These results suggest that internal workplace conditions affect both workers' and regulatory agents' interpretations of potentially discriminatory experiences, while institutional conditions matter only for regulatory agents' interpretations of those events.     

Political elites and regulatory bureaucrats: a case study concerning age discrimination

In 1988, the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging held a hearing on effectiveness of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) with regard to age discrimination cases. The Hearing reported that approximately 7,500 age-based claims had run the statute of limitations. The article analyzes the ideological context of regulation, first, by explaining the purpose, procedures, and effectiveness of the EEOC in enforcing the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Secondly, the article analyzes the 1988 Senate Hearing, including background issues and immediate outcomes. Thirdly, it discusses what has happened since 1988 from the perspectives of political elites, regulatory bureaucrats, and interest-group members.     

Excluding women from certain jobs because of reproductive or fetal hazard must be justified by objective, scientific evidence.

The EEOC has now established that the application of fetal protection policies that discriminate against one sex but not the other must be justified by medical evidence. The successful application of such policies in lead contamination and X-ray exposure situations is examined in this column.     

Workplace discrimination, deafness and hearing impairment: the national EEOC ADA research project

Data compiled by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in its Integrated Mission System, provide documentation regarding the employment discrimination experience of Americans who are deaf or hard of hearing. This paper presents an analysis of 8,936 allegations filed by persons with hearing impairment and closed by EEOC between July 26, 1992 and September 30, 2003, as compared to 165,674 allegations filed by individuals with other physical or sensory disabilities. The investigators compare and contrast demographic characteristics of Charging Parties, characteristics of Respondents, the nature of allegations, and the outcomes of the allegations in order to illustrate how these variables differ between the two groups, herein referred to as HEARING (deaf, hard of hearing, or other hearing impairment) and GENDIS (general disability). Most allegations derived from both groups were filed against larger Respondents (those with 500+ workers). The most common allegation issues in the HEARING group involved matters of discharge, reasonable accommodation, and hiring. Outcomes derived from HEARING allegations were more likely to result in merit resolutions when compared to GENDIS, by a 25% to 21% margin.     

Table of Contents

Parity Implementation Coalition Requests Federal Intervention in Florida BCBS Case Minn. Treatment Center Ratchets Up Process of Analyzing Outcomes NASADAD Inquiry Finds SSA Involvement in DUI/DWI Programs EEOC Sues Company for Sidelining Trucker for Alcohol Abuse Why We ALL Need Recovery Briefly Noted In the States Resources Coming up     

Table of Contents

Va. Report: Treatment Cost‐Effective, but More Proof Needed Before Money will Flow CASA Report Links Marijuana Harms to Increased Potency Program Sued by EEOC for Firing Counselor on Methadone Odyssey House to Run Collaborative Program with New York Corrections Study of ‘Avoidable Costs’ of Alcohol Abuse Urges Interventions Briefly Noted State Watch Business Resources Names in the News Call for Applications Coming up     

Workplace discrimination and cancer

Data from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Integrated Mission System database were analyzed with specific reference to allegations of workplace discrimination filed by individuals with cancer under ADA Title One. These 6,832 allegations, filed between July 27, 1992 and September 30, 2003, were compared to 167,798 allegations from a general disability population on the following dimensions: type of workplace discrimination; demographic characteristics of the charging parties (CPs); the industry designation, location, and size of employers; and the outcome or resolution of EEOC investigations. Results showed allegations derived from CPs with cancer were more likely than those in the general disability population to include issues involving discharge, terms and conditions of employment, lay-off, wages, and demotion. Compared to the general disability group, CPs with cancer were more likely to be female, older, and White. Allegations derived from CPs with cancer were also more likely to be filed against smaller employers (15-100 workers) or those in service industries. Finally, the resolution of allegations by CPs with cancer were more likely to be meritorious than those filed from the general disability population; that is, actual discrimination is more likely to have occurred.     

Gender as a differential indicator of the employment discrimination experiences of Americans with multiple sclerosis

Information from the Integrated Mission System of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was used to investigate the employment discrimination experiences of women and men with multiple sclerosis (MS). Spanning the years 1992 to 2003, the EEOC database included 3,663 allegations of discrimination filed by 2,167 adults with MS. With respect to women and men with MS, the researchers examined the comparability of a) demographic characteristics; b) industry designations, locations, and size of employers; c) the nature of discrimination alleged; and d) the legal outcome or resolution of those allegations. On average, women and men with MS were in their early forties, with the majority of both groups being Caucasian. Both women and men were most likely to allege discrimination related to discharge and reasonable accommodations, although women were more likely to file harassment charges than men. Men with MS were more likely to allege discrimination regarding hiring and reinstatement. Women with MS were more likely to file allegations against employers in the service industries, and men were more likely to file allegations against employers in the construction, manufacturing, and wholesale industries. No gender differences were found in the geographic distribution of allegations. Both groups had comparable rates of merit closures (23% vs. 27%) as a result of the EEOC's investigatory process. Implications for rehabilitation counseling and employer-oriented interventions are discussed.     

Race,threat and workplace sexual harassment: The dynamics of harassment in the United States, 1997–2016

Sexual harassment is a persistent problem for women in the workplace. Prior research has explored the effects of sexual harassment on the psychological, physical and economic wellbeing of the victims. Despite the extensive research exploring the causes, most studies focus on micro‐level factors, and few studies examine the role of macro‐level factors on sexual harassment in the workplace. Using public Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) data and a separate dataset of individual level workplace sexual harassment complaints, we test two hypotheses about sexual harassment in American workplaces. First, we show that the decline in workplace sexual harassment complaints has been uneven, with African‐American women experiencing an increased relative risk of sexual harassment in the workplace, even as overall reported harassment complaints are down. Second, we show that economic threat — operationalized in this case through unemployment rates — drives increases in sexual harassment of women in American workplaces. While the data on harassment complaints is limited, data strongly suggests that the changes are driven by shifts in underlying levels of harassment, rather than changes in the likelihood of reporting harassment.     

Drivers of workplace discrimination against people with disabilities: the utility of Attribution Theory

The purpose of this paper was to determine what drives workplace discrimination against people with disabilities. These findings are then compared to available literature on attribution theory, which concerns itself with public perceptions of the controllability and stability of various impairments. The sample included 35,763 allegations of discriminations filed by people with disabilities under the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Group A included impairments deemed by Corrigan et al. [1988] to be uncontrollable but stable: visual impairment (representing 13% of the total allegations in this study), cancer (12%), cardiovascular disease (19%), and spinal cord injuries (5%). The controllable but unstable impairments in group B included depression (38%), schizophrenia (2%), alcohol and other drug abuse (4%), and HIV/AIDS (7%). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had resolved all allegations in terms of merit Resolutions (a positive finding of discrimination) and Resolutions without merit. Allegations of workplace discrimination were found to center mainly on hiring, discharge, harassment, and reasonable accommodation issues. Perceived workplace discrimination (as measured by allegations filed with EEOC) does occur at higher levels in Group B, especially when serious issues involving discharge and disability harassment are involved. With the glaring exception of HIV/AIDS, however, actual discrimination (as measured by EEOC merit Resolutions) occurs at higher levels for Group A.     

EEOC issues new opioid guidance for patients and providers

Last week, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued new guidance explaining nondiscrimination and reasonable accommodation provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) that apply to people “not engaged in the current illegal use of drugs” who are qualified for employment. The documents, “Use of Codeine, Oxycodone, and Other Opioids: Information for Employees” and “How Health Care Providers Can Help Current and Former Patients Who Have Used Opioids Stay Employed,” underscore the rights of people who are using opioids, are addicted to opioids or were addicted to opioids in the past but are not currently using drugs illegally.     

Spatial Variation in U.S. Labor Markets and Workplace Gender Segregation: 1980–2005*

Many studies of workplace inequality have examined why workplace gender segregation still exists and how gender segregation affects workplaces (Cohen, Huffman, and Knauer 2009 Work and Occupations 36(4):318; Huffman, Cohen, and Pearlman 2010 Administrative Science Quarterly 55(2):255). Yet, fewer studies have examined how space might affect gender segregation. In this paper, we investigate two types of space, normative space and industrial space, and their influence on gender workplace segregation within geographic space. We use data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and mixed models to examine how normative and industrial spaces affect workplaces within geographic space. We find that both measures of normative and industrial space predict differing levels of gender segregation within geographic spaces (measured via commuting zones). In addition, the effects normative space (women's share of the labor force) has on gender segregation are mediated by industrial restructuring.     

An overview of and comments on the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)

The authors overview the key components of the ADA in this article. A discussion is offered on why and how persons with disabilities are discriminated against. Critical United States Supreme Court decisions are presented; these decisions have greatly limited the power of the ADA in protecting the rights of persons with disabilities. Even though the United States Supreme Court has narrowed the impact of the ADA in American life, a number of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) cases are presented suggesting this federal agency is attempting to protect persons with disabilities against discrimination. Finally, the authors deal with the topic of advocacy; advocacy may well be one of the most effective tools to help insure that the rights of people with disabilities are protected.     

An Overview of and Comments on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Abstract

The authors overview the key components of the ADA in this article. A discussion is offered on why and how persons with disabilities are discriminated against. Critical United States Supreme Court decisions are presented; these decisions have greatly limited the power of the ADA in protecting the rights of persons with disabilities. Even though the United States Supreme Court has narrowed the impact of the ADA in American life, a number of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) cases are presented suggesting this federal agency is attempting to protect persons with disabilities against discrimination. Finally, the authors deal with the topic of advocacy; advocacy may well be one of the most effective tools to help insure that the rights of people with disabilities are protected.     

An Analysis of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) in the Twenty-First Century

Abstract

In this paper, the author overviews the key components of the ADA. A discussion is offered on why and how persons with disabilities are discriminated against. The standard stereotypes often heard about persons with disabilities are offered. Critical United States Supreme Court decisions are presented; these decisions have greatly limited the power of the ADA in protecting the rights of persons with disabilities. Even though the United States Supreme Court has narrowed the impact of the ADA in American life, a number of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) cases are presented, suggesting this federal agency is attempting to protect persons with disabilities against discrimination. The final part of the paper deals with the topic of advocacy; advocacy may well be one of the most effective tools to help insure that the rights of people with disabilities are protected in the 21st century.     

Who Is Protected?

Many employers have excluded women whose infertility is not medically documented from allegedly hazardous work claiming they feared if the women became pregnant, their fetuses would be harmed. In United Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls, the Supreme Court held in 1991 that so-called "fetal protection policies" are unlawful sex discrimination. After examining four cases challenging exclusionary policies in Britain and the United States, this article unmasks and argues against the assumptions underlying such policies. By returning to well-established sex discrimination doctrine, moving away from a male norm, and reaffirming women's right to both work and have children, the Supreme Court's decision in UAW V. Johnson Controls is an important victory. The decision should help to break down job segregation, prompt the EEOC to act, and clear the way for addressing questions of health and safety rather than equality and difference.     

Organizational Variation in Formal Equal Employment Opportunity Structures1

This article identifies the factors associated with variation in the complexity of formal equal employment opportunity (EEO) structures across a sample of Washington and Oregon hospitals. Understanding such variation provides insight into two key organizational processes: commitment to workplace equality and response to external pressures for equality. We draw on Oliver’s (1991) organizational strategic response theory to document the extent to which a hospital’s patient demographics, legal regulation, economic sector, geographic location, and health system membership are related to complexity in the level of a hospital’s formal EEO structures. Findings from ordered logistic regression analyses demonstrate that the presence of a nurse union and federal regulation of a hospital by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) are associated with less complex EEO structures. Meanwhile, urbanization is associated with more complex EEO structures. We discuss implications of these results for research and policy and offer the beginnings of a general theory of organizational variation.     

The Declining Significance of Race in Federal Civil Rights Law: The Social Structure of Employment Discrimination Claims

We examine changes in the nature and rate of complaints filed with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the past 35 years. The EEOC's role has shifted over this period from ensuring job access for racial minorities to providing diverse protections for a much broader class of incumbent workers. We first describe trends in discrimination complaints, most notably the shift from racial discrimination to other bases of discrimination, and develop a conceptual model of choice among socially structured alternatives to account for them. We then test the model with a time series analysis of changes in the complaint rate among different worker groups to evaluate the relative importance of legal, political, and socioeconomic determinants of civil rights complaints. Net of changes in the political climate, benefit compensation, inequality, and education levels, we find that legal changes and group-specific unemployment rates are the strongest and most consistent determinants of the rate of race, sex, and total discrimination complaints. Our results suggest that people will bear the costs of filing a complaint when legal options are relatively attractive and when employment options on the external labor market are unattractive.