Question

If Equal Employement Opportunity Commision v. Consolidated Service Systems was tried as a disparate treatment case, how would you balance the advantages of word of mouth recruiting against the possibility of discriminatory treatment?

Answer 1

This is the equal employment opprotunity commision brought this suit in 1985 against a small company which provides janitorial and cleaning services at a number of building in the Chicago area. The owner of the company is a Korean immigrant as are most of its employees, The suit charges that the company discriminatory in favour of persons of Korean origin in violation of the tiltle 7 fo Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C 2000e et seq. by replying mainly on word of mouth to obtain new employees . After a bench trail the district judge dismissed the suit on the ground that the commission had failed to prove discrimination.

There is no direct evidence of discriminaiton the jargon of Title 7 cases fot the EEOC has not appealed from the district courts rejection of its disparate impact theory of liablity. we said the passive stance is the cheapest method of recruitment It may also be highly effective in producing a good work force. There are two reasons The first is that an applicant referred by an existing employee is likely to get a franker, more accurate more relevant picture of working condition than if he learns about the job from an employment agency a newspaper ad or a hiring supervisior. .

If this were a disparate impact case as it was once but the commision has abandoned its claim of disparate impact. and if contrary to EEOC v. Chicago Miniature Lamp Works. the advantages of word of mouth is give the more power for the employement opprotunity and the service system will create the employement opprotunity.