If the employer is choosing specific employees to relocate, does a company have to be aware of their race and gender?
If it turns out that all the employees who have to move to Toledo are women or people of color, that’s grounds for a disparate-impact claim. Absolutely,it happens all the time. If, during a relocation, some employees are being allowed to stay in the office, while others are being relocated, that should really be assessed. Who is getting the option to stay and who isn’t? Look at all the protected categories — race, age, gender — to make sure these people aren’t the ones being forced to relocate.
8 replies (most recent on top)
Does it apply if they are all white males?
Not only is there a disparate impact claim… or lets just call it RACIST
So not giving special treatment is now racist too?
They’re forcing people to move to Toledo? Egads.
Do this. Go to the sharepoint that has the archive of all of the promotions and org changes. T likes to sweep groups of people under different orgs 3-6 months prior to laying them off. They’re either swept in the safe pile or the targeted pile. It takes a little digging but who cares when the payoff is so big. The targeted group is easy to spot. Majority will live outside of hubs, be older, or employees that are not people of color.
Map it out move by move. It’s barely a game of experienced checkers with T thinking at most, two turns ahead. It’s easier to track than their gifting of DTV to their insider investment group out of Dallas for pennies on the dollar.
Places being closed is a reflection of lazy workers to productive centers in ATL.
Or perhaps if you look at the demographics of the office that's been moved perhaps it's representative.
Not only is there a disparate impact claim… or lets just call it RACIST, but when the targeted employees call their bluff and say yes to relocate, if they are the undesired, they are still let go. That is double racism. Hi Jeremy.
Toledo? Is that a Hub? No. Fake post.