The states where blacks and Hispanics are much less likely to have a job than whites

By Niraj Chokshi, The Washington Post

Black unemployment in Ohio is 3.3 times higher than it is for whites. In Illinois, it's also 3.3 times as high. And the disparity is similar across the country.

The black unemployment rate is more than double the white rate in 20 out of the 24 states with populations large enough for accurate estimates, according to new research on unemployment by state and race for the third quarter of the year. Nationwide, while the white unemployment rate was 5.1 percent in September, the black unemployment rate was 9.2 percent.

Read the story here.

Bill introduced in congress to forbid discrimination in hiring the unemployed

Lexology.com
Fox Rothschild LLP Richard B. Cohen USA
July 14 2011

In our blog entry of February 22, 2011, we noted that under the anti-discrimination laws there is no protected class known as “the unemployed,” and if you are not hired because of your unemployment status, you have no actionable claim of discrimination.

In our blog entry of June 8, 2011, we gave this warning:

“No laws or regulations yet exist which forbid the use of employment status as a hiring criteria, but given the increase in the jobless rate, an employer who is hiring is certain to encounter applicants who are unemployed or who have unexplained gaps in their resumes. Don’t automatically disqualify these applicants, or advertise that only the employed need apply – there is no point in looking for increased scrutiny in these uncertain economic times.”

A law directly on this point may now be in the offing. With the unemployment rate currently hovering at around 9.2 per cent, with long term unemployment an increasing problem, and with an increasing number of employers advertising that the unemployed “need not apply,” two Democratic members of Congress have this week introduced a bill, the Fair Employment Opportunity Act of 2011, H.R. 2501,which would prohibit employers from refusing employment to persons on the basis of their being unemployed, and also prohibit employers from advertising that the unemployed “need not apply.”

Full Story: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f04276e5-7108-44c1-955d-cc7b472ca376&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+Federal+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2011-07-21&utm_term=

Bias Against the Unemployed Is Subject of Probe

The Wall Street Journal
CAREERS
FEBRUARY 17, 2011, 6:08 P.M. ET

By MELANIE TROTTMAN
WASHINGTON—The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has begun a probe of whether employers and recruitment firms are unlawfully barring the unemployed from applying for certain jobs, the agency's chairman said.
EEOC Chairman Jacqueline Berrien said at a hearing Wednesday that the agency began hearing anecdotal reports of the practice last summer, including from news reports and from worker-advocacy groups gathering examples of help-wanted advertisements that said only individuals who currently had jobs should apply.
"We'll take a close look at what we heard and consider if there's anything we might need to do to clarify standards," she said.
It isn't clear what the EEOC will do to address the issue, or to what extent it is authorized to act. EEOC and Labor Department officials said they don't have much data on whether the practice of excluding unemployed people from applicant pools is widespread. Lawyers representing employers say it isn't, and even when it is done it can be justified based on employers' need to find workers whose skills are up to date.

Full Story: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148753562462750.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Deaf Hurt by "Current Employment" Requirement?

About.com Deafness
Saturday February 19, 2011
By Jamie Berke, About.com Guide since 1997

This past week, the news story that held my attention the most was the one about how the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is investigating whether the practice of requiring people to be "currently employed" in the job search is discriminatory. On February 16, the EEOC held a widely-reported hearing on this issue. Disabled people are one category of people that the EEOC is concerned this practice may have a disproportionate impact on.
How could the job advertisement statement "must be currently employed" potentially have a disproportionate impact on deaf and hard of hearing people?

Full Story: http://deafness.about.com/b/2011/02/19/deaf-hurt-by-current-employment-requirement.htm

Out of Work? Out of Luck

U..S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
PRESS RELEASE
2-16-11

EEOC Examines Employers’ Treatment of Unemployed Job Applicants at Hearing

WASHINGTON—In a public meeting held today, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) examined the impact of employers considering only those currently employed for job vacancies.
“Throughout its 45 year history, the EEOC has identified and remedied discrimination in hiring and remains committed to ensuring job applicants are treated fairly,” said EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien. “Today’s meeting gave the Commission an important opportunity to learn about the emerging practice of excluding unemployed persons from applicant pools.”
According to Helen Norton, Associate Professor at the University of Colorado School of Law, employers and staffing agencies have publicly advertised jobs in fields ranging from electronic engineers to restaurant and grocery managers to mortgage underwriters with the explicit restriction that only currently employed candidates will be considered. “Some employers may use current employment as a signal of quality job performance,” Norton testified. “But such a correlation is decidedly weak. A blanket reliance on current employment serves as a poor proxy for successful job performance.”
“The use of an individual’s current or recent unemployment status as a hiring selection device is a troubling development in the labor market,” said Fatima Goss Graves, Vice President for Education and Employment of the National Women’s Law Center. She noted that this practice “may well act as a negative counterweight” to government efforts to get people back to work. Women, particularly older women and those in non-traditional occupations, are disproportionately affected by this restriction, testified Goss Graves.
Denying jobs to the already-unemployed can also have a disproportionate effect on certain racial and ethnic minority community members, Algernon Austin, Director of the Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy of the Economic Policy Institute, explained. Unemployment rates for African-Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans are higher than those of whites. When comparing college-educated workers, the unemployment rate for Asians is also higher. Thus, restricting applications to the currently employed could place a heavier burden on people of color, he concluded.
The use of employment status to screen job applicants could also seriously impact people with disabilities, according to Joyce Bender, an expert in the employment of people with disabilities. “Given my experience, I can say without a doubt that the practice of excluding persons who are currently unemployed from applicant pools is real and can have a negative impact on persons with disabilities,” Bender told the Commission.
Dr. William Spriggs, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Policy, offered data supporting this testimony. Spriggs presented current national employment statistics showing that African-Americans and Hispanics are overrepresented among the unemployed. He also stated that excluding the unemployed would be more likely to limit opportunities for older applicants as well as persons with disabilities.
“At a moment when we all should be doing whatever we can to open up job opportunities to the unemployed, it is profoundly disturbing that the trend of deliberately excluding the jobless from work opportunities is on the rise,” said Christine Owens, Executive Director of the National Employment Law Project. In addition to presenting statistical evidence, she recounted stories unemployed workers have shared with her organization where they were told directly that they would not be considered for employment due to being unemployed.
James Urban, a partner at the Jones Day law firm, who counsels employers, expressed doubt as to the extent of the problem. Fernan Cepero, representing the Society of Human Resource Professionals, told the Commission that his organization is not aware of this practice being in regular use. But both Mr. Urban and Mr. Cepero noted that the automatic exclusion of unemployed persons from consideration does not constitute “due diligence” in the screening of job applicants.
The EEOC enforces the nation’s laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov. Materials from this Commission meeting, including statements and biographies of the witnesses, may be found at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/meetings/2-16-11/index.cfm.
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/2-16-11.cfm

Job Seekers Find Bias Against The Unemployed

NPR
November 17, 2010
by John Ydstie

Unemployed workers face big hurdles as they try to get new jobs in today's economy. First, there's the numbers game: Close to 25 million workers unemployed or under-employed looking for jobs. In fact, there are five unemployed workers for every single job opening in the economy.
Increasingly, though, jobless workers are facing the ultimate barrier. Some employers are saying if you're out of work, we don't want to hire you.

Full Story and Audio: http://www.npr.org/2010/11/16/131367533/some-will-only-hire-if-you-already-have-a-job