Different Strokes for Different Folks
I got a call last week from a woman in Michigan who was in a great deal of distress about what was happening to her at work. She is employed in a sales position for a large company. She told me that she became aware of different criteria being used to judge performance for different individuals in the sales department in which she worked.
From documents she saw, one formula was being used to evaluate the white men, and a second formula was being used for the one African American in the sales department. A third formula was being used for the one and only woman. She shared her concern with the African American employee. He filed a grievance. She believes that she is now being retaliated against and is fearful that she will lose her job. Let's hope not.
There are three important points to share about this scenario: 
- One of the prime ways to prove discrimination is by proving a difference in treatment. If different standards are being used to evaluate performance for the same or similar jobs, it very well may prove discrimination. The practice of using different criteria to judge the same people in the same jobs is exposing a company to risk.
- Retaliation is a separate claim under the law which prohibits discrimination. If a person raises a complaint -- whether formal or informal -- about discrimination or a perceived civil rights violation and is retaliated against because of it, it's illegal.
- If a person sticks up for or advocates on behalf of a minority who is being discriminated against, and then is retaliated against because of it, the retaliation is illegal.
I wrote about the topic of white employees sticking up for black friends in a recent article. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals case of Barrett v. Whirlpool Corporation involved a white employee who protested the racially hostile atmosphere confronting some of her friends at work. She was retaliated against because of her advocacy. The court stated that she had a right to be free from retaliation under those circumstances under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
It is sad but true that many women in sales positions are discriminated against with regularity. They are often held to higher standards, given less preferential accounts, and excluded from networking opportunities. When they complain, they are commonly retaliated against.
I had one case involving a woman who worked for seventeen years in sales for a very large corporation without a promotion. She was regularly training young men brought in by her bosses. The trainees were then promoted over her. Since she was a single mom with a pretty good paying job she felt she could not complain.
Finally one day she had it and decided enough was enough. She voiced her concern to her boss and was immediately shut down. She filed a complaint with the EEOC claiming gender discrimination. When her boss found out about the charge, he fired her on the spot shouting: "You better find the best god damn lawyer that you can." We settled the case about eighteen months later.
It seems like no matter how much training and education is provided, there is still is a lack of awareness that a difference in treatment of individuals in similar positions is discriminatory. Sadly true is that when an employee has the nerve to point it out, retaliation is often common which exposes the employee to all sorts emotional and financial distress and the employer to needless liability.
image:www.fotosearch.com
