Log In Sign Up

Pepsi sued for Racial Bias


Forum: Heated Debates

Notices

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Heated Debates LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
January 11th, 2012, 05:06 PM
Linzie's Avatar Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 466
Send a message via MSN to Linzie Send a message via Skype™ to Linzie
Pepsi Beverages pays $3.1M in racial bias case - Yahoo! News

Quote:
Pepsi Beverages Co. will pay $3.1 million to settle federal charges of race discrimination for using criminal background checks to screen out job applicants — even if they weren't convicted of a crime.

Quote:
EEOC officials said the company's policy of not hiring workers with arrest records disproportionately excluded more than 300 black applicants. The policy barred applicants who had been arrested, but not convicted of a crime, and denied employment to others who were convicted of minor offenses.
Quote:
EEOC officials have said, for example, that an old drunken driving conviction may not be relevant to a clerical job, but a theft conviction may disqualify someone from working at a bank.

Julie Schmid, acting director of the EEOC's Minneapolis office, said the EEOC recommends that employers consider the nature and gravity of offenses, the time that has passed since conviction or completion of a sentence, and the nature of the job sought.
While I can see the EOCC's point in looking at what the charges were and blah blah blah, I still don't see how it was Pepsi's fault that out of their applicants, more blacks and hispanics were arrested/ convicted of crimes and therefore unfit for employment under their old policy.

It seems that criminals are becoming a "race" of their own...

Thoughts?
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #2  
January 11th, 2012, 06:30 PM
BittyBugsMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,317
If I were Pepsi, I'd be fighting that. That is crazy.
__________________
~Alicia~
Reply With Quote
  #3  
January 11th, 2012, 07:18 PM
*Jennifer*'s Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: California
Posts: 5,500
I agree. How is not hiring someone due to their arrest record tied to their race?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
January 11th, 2012, 08:06 PM
Poncho06's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,040
Unless they were only excluding candidates based upon crimes that are statistically commited by a particular race I'm not sure how they are knowingly practicing racism.

They are in the wrong, however, for excluding candidates who were arrested or convicted for crimes that are irrelevant for the job.

Quote:
Using arrest and conviction records to deny employment can be illegal if it's irrelevant for the job, according to the EEOC, which enforces the nation's employment discrimination laws.
__________________




Reply With Quote
  #5  
January 12th, 2012, 09:51 AM
K.A.T's Avatar Enjoying her Sticky Bun
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,499
Team Jamie. I see the wrong with excluding applicants just for being arrested. What if it was a false arrest?
__________________

❤ Big Thanks to Vicki, trishosaurus, & Shortcake for the great siggies of my kids! ❤
Liz (36) Kev (35)
Tiana (16) Doni (14) Lil Kev (8) Ethan 7/23/12 Lil Roo 10/29/11



Reply With Quote
  #6  
January 12th, 2012, 11:50 AM
Repti.Mom's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 15,641
This type of thing is probably why employers don't tell you the reason why you didn't get hired. Pepsi could have avoided the whole thing by giving a simple "you were not fit for the position".
__________________







Reply With Quote
  #7  
January 12th, 2012, 12:11 PM
fluffycheeks's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Repti.Mom View Post
This type of thing is probably why employers don't tell you the reason why you didn't get hired. Pepsi could have avoided the whole thing by giving a simple "you were not fit for the position".
By law, if there is a background check, they are required to provide you with the results of that check when asked.

I don't agree with denying someone for a job if there has been an arrest that never resulted in a conviction. But I wouldn't want to hire someone with a record, whether it was related to the job or not. If someone is willing to break the law, I will have a harder time trusting them to abide by the rules and regulations of the company as well.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
January 12th, 2012, 12:53 PM
K.A.T's Avatar Enjoying her Sticky Bun
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluffycheeks View Post
By law, if there is a background check, they are required to provide you with the results of that check when asked.

I don't agree with denying someone for a job if there has been an arrest that never resulted in a conviction. But I wouldn't want to hire someone with a record, whether it was related to the job or not. If someone is willing to break the law, I will have a harder time trusting them to abide by the rules and regulations of the company as well.
But what if that conviction was many years ago, say 10+, do you really think they wouldn't have changed after that long?
__________________

❤ Big Thanks to Vicki, trishosaurus, & Shortcake for the great siggies of my kids! ❤
Liz (36) Kev (35)
Tiana (16) Doni (14) Lil Kev (8) Ethan 7/23/12 Lil Roo 10/29/11



Reply With Quote
  #9  
January 12th, 2012, 01:14 PM
fluffycheeks's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by K.A.T View Post
But what if that conviction was many years ago, say 10+, do you really think they wouldn't have changed after that long?

Things beyond 7 years ago generally don't even show up. Anything that shows up in an employment background criminal record check will either be fairly recent or pretty serious.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:54 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0