Over a five-year period, an upscale restaurant hired 108 food servers, all of wh
ID: 460033 • Letter: O
Question
Over a five-year period, an upscale restaurant hired 108 food servers, all of whom were men. Of the hundreds of applicants during this time, only about 3 percent were women. Charges were filed with the EEOC. For the next five years, women constituted 22 percent of applicants and 21.7 percent of persons hired. In both periods, food servers were recruited and hired through a “roll call” procedure. Applicants were expected to be familiar with this procedure and to report to the restaurant on a particular weekend in October to be interviewed. The restaurant did not post or advertise job openings. However, the court found that there was general knowledge of the roll call procedure among local food servers. Interviews were conducted by a male maitre d’, who selected candidates based on his assessment of their appearance, articulation, attitude, and experience. After the EEOC charges were filed, this procedure was modified to substitute a panel of managers for the maitre d’ and a test that involved the lifting of a loaded serving tray. The percentage of applicants at other area restaurants who were female ranged between 30 and 42 percent. According to Census data, approximately 32 percent of table servers who resided in the same city as the restaurant and had earnings comparable to the food servers at the restaurant were female. Unable to obtain a conciliation agreement, the EEOC sued the restaurant. What should the court decide? Why
Explanation / Answer
The court should decide against the restaurant. The initial low rate of female applicants clearly indicates that women do not feel comfortable applying to open positions as table servers there. Even after the EEOC stepped in, the percentage of women applicants remained significantly lower than that of similar businesses in the area.
There seems to be no focus on attracting and retaining diverse talent. The roll call method clearly indicates that the restaurant is not working towards getting more woman applicants. Also, lifting of a loaded serving tray is discriminatory as the same objective can be met by carrying a tray twice over, while being less loaded. This might be more convenient for females.
In short, over a five year period, even with the intervention of the EEOC, no signficant steps were taken to make the job femal-friendly. Hence, the restaurant should be liable.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.