Discrimination & Harassment

Hiring & Testing

Outten & Golden strives to protect workers from unlawful hiring and testing practices. When employers base their hiring on tests and criteria that negatively impact a particular group of employees (such as women, people of color, or older workers), they violate federal and state anti-discrimination laws. Determining whether a particular test or hiring practice violates the law takes specialized knowledge and skill, and the attorneys at Outten & Golden are particularly well versed in this complicated area of the law. 

Anti-discrimination laws prohibit employers from creating barriers to employment that negatively impact protected applicants. Outten & Golden represents workers challenging unlawful testing against public as well as private employers to break down unfair barriers and allow the best candidates to be hired, regardless of sex, race, age, or disability. If you believe you have been subjected to unlawful hiring and testing practices, please contact the firm through the "Contact Us" form or by calling us in the New York, Chicago, San Francisco, or Washington, DC office (see bottom of page for phone numbers) to begin the Outten & Golden intake process.

News

Aspiring Interns Seek Class Cert. In P&G DACA Bias Suit

Law360 - Tiffany Hu

Rejected prospective interns accusing Procter & Gamble Co. of discriminating against those with temporary work authorization under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program have asked a Florida federal court for class certification.

Lead plaintiff and Venezuela native David M. Rodriguez said in Friday's motion that P&G's alleged policy of automatically rejecting candidates without "unrestricted work authorization" uniformly applied to hundreds of non-U.S. citizens who can otherwise legally work in the country, such as DACA recipients, temporary protected status beneficiaries and...

Judging Job Bias by Comparing Workers: Circuit Court Rules Vary

Bloomberg Law - Robert Iafolla

Many courts require workers alleging job discrimination to compare themselves to similarly situated colleagues who didn’t face bias. A federal appeals court in Atlanta recently suggested it did those workers a favor by relaxing its definition for those comparable coworkers.

But in the same decision, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit also gave employers a boost. The court said judges should thoroughly assess such comparator evidence when workers make their initial showing of discrimination, before employers have to give their reason for taking an allegedly biased action.

...