race and national origin issue

R

rcris

New Member
I work in a large financial firm and the company in general has strong ethics enforcement. The issue is my group in particular and specifically my MD is and only wants employees from one race/country. For about an year I thought this was just favoritism - but doesn't look so anymore. I see the department with just a few from that race to now dominant with them - they don't even look at a resume from anybody else or look enough to give an excuse for HR why he is not a fit. He promotes people of this class - a junior to me to a director in the middle of the year - out of standard term. He doesn't lay me or others from other races because then he cannot justify hiring immigrant works from his race. Instead he makes us so miserable that many people have moved on. Out of about 50 new hires all were from his race with exactly one black who left within a year. He only gives the strategic projects to this race and others get he remaining - either throwaway or those that are deemed/required to fail to give business case for the strategic projects. I now feel this is definitely a case of discrimination against race/national origin.

My q is how should I go about as I see 4 ways:
1) Complain to a 3rd party ethics enforcement team hired by the company board - personal info is not revealed
2) Complain to HR
3) Find a lawyer and file a suit
4) File with state/fed eeoc.

Appreciate all suggestions
Thanks
 
I have one question for you. This is not for the sake of determining whether you can take action; it is for the purpose of determining which action I recommend you take. No matter what the answer, there is something you can do, but the answer to my question will determine which of your four (well, really three; one of your four choices is not really available to you yet) actions is the best to start with.

Are you a member of the race the doctor favors, or one that is not? In other words, are you personally adversely affected by this, or does his bias affect you favorably?
 
It seems/sounds from the way post is written, OP is among those who are adversely affected but will hold for OP to verify.
 
rcris said:
My q is how should I go about as I see 4 ways:
1) Complain to a 3rd party ethics enforcement team hired by the company board - personal info is not revealed
2) Complain to HR
3) Find a lawyer and file a suit
4) File with state/fed eeoc.
Click to expand...

Yes, those are FOUR excellent ideas and/or options.

If I were in your position, I'd simply seek new employment where ALL are treated as equally as humanly possible.

We've come so very far as a nation, but we never seem to arrive at our preferred destination.

PROVING "TRICKERATION" or "SHENANIGANS" is much harder than SUSPECTING "TRICKERATION" or "SHENANIGANS"!!!!
 
Last edited:
Of the four options, there is one that is currently not available to the poster. It may be at some point in future, but it is not now.
 
cbg said:
Of the four options, there is one that is currently not available to the poster. It may be at some point in future, but it is not now.
Click to expand...

I would concur.
To somewhat follow the logic of former president Clinton, it all depends on what the meaning of option is. LOL
 
It would be nice if OP would come back & let us know if they are definitely one of the employees adversely affected.
 
Sorry for not checking the post earlier. I am adversely affected. My comp has been significantly reduced as well as they are promoting less qualified people. I am looking for a job but the market is not great. Should I just resign or keep working till I find one ? Does either help my case if suit filed ?

Going forward, I am sure I cannot be considered for promotion as all strategic work is given to them. I only get to work on the negative projects that form a justification for the strategic ones i.e. it needs a lot of headcount to success and with just me is destined to fail. They raise unreasonable expectations that even the strategic direction cannot satisfy.
 
Neither quitting nor continuing to work makes any difference to any claim you may have.

If you were not adversely affected I'd tell you to go with #1. Since you are, this is the ideal order:

#2. It's always better for any future claim if you attempt to work it out internally first. If this works, you don't need to go any further. If it does not, proceed to:
#4. You MUST have a right to sue letter from either the EEOC or the state equivalent before you are allowed to proceed to:
#3.
 
thx cbg, not sure if it was a typo, but I am adversely affected - both comp reduced and passed over by others. Will this change ur suggestion.

If I do go by the above order then they will get alerted and maybe hire 5 just to get past the issue. If they don't do anything on my case, what will be my options.
In step 2, it will be open and I may get retaliation as they will then start saying I didn't perform even though they didn't say in my annuals.
 
I understand that you are adversely affected. My answer was made on that presumption. IF you were not adversely affected, I would have advised the ethics line. Since you are adversely affected, my answer is 2, 4, and 3 in that order.

If you are retaliated against for making the complaint you have legal protections.

Obviously I can't make you follow my suggestions. If you'd rather call the ethics line that's up to you. The law does not require that you make a complaint to HR first but not doing so can hurt any eventual claim you make with a regulatory agency. You are prohibited by law from filing a lawsuit before you have a right to sue letter from a regulatory agency.

It sounds like I'm yelling at you. I'm not, just explaining.

How would you like to handle it? Again, I'm asking for a reason.
 
rcris said:
I am looking for a job but the market is not great. Should I just resign or keep working till I find one ?
Click to expand...

I might mention if you quit (resign), you "most likely" will not receive unemployment ins. while looking for other employment.
 
Cbg, my only concern to going to hr is that I pretty much will not han an option to continue to work under my mgr and considering my will area can't work for anybody else in the firm. Isn't complaining in ethics line where one of the options is emp discrimination be sufficient to file with EEOC ? I can go to hr as soon as I have an offer and before I resign.

Also, I assume you are saying I should get the clearance from them before approaching a lawyer.

The Betty - that would mean I can't quit as I have Mort + need insurance for kids. I may have an option to join a startup at my original wages. considering the risks of a startup job is it better to wait for a regular one ?
 
Last edited:
You are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying you have to get clearance from anyone to get a lawyer.

You can go direct to the EEOC without going to HR - a stop at HR is not required by law. But one of the first things the EEOC is going to say is, What have you done internally to try to correct the problem? And if you say, Nothing, I bypassed HR and went straight to you (or even, I called a 3rd party ethics line and made an anonymous complaint), it is quite possible that they will say, "Sorry, not interested". They are overworked and understaffed and cannot take on every complaint that is made - they are much more likely to be interested in an investigation when the employer has been given the opportunity to fix the problem on their own and failed to do so.

You CANNOT file a lawsuit until or unless you have a right to sue from the EEOC or the state equivalent. That is the law.

If you are fired or treated adversely because you filed a complaint, you DO have legal recourse.
 
If you want to report this to the ethics enforcement team rather than HR, go ahead. It is just that it helps with a complaint to the EEOC if you report it to HR first. You have to make a report/complaint to the EEOC & get a right to sue letter from them before you can sue.

Re unemployment ins., it would have to be your decision whether to resign & go with the start up co. or stay until you find "regular" employment. However; if you went with the start up co. & got let go, you could file for unemployment ins. at that time. The state would decide if you qualify. If you don't resign from your current job but get fired or are adversely affected for filing a complaint with the EEOC, there is legal recourse you can take as cbg noted.
 
Last edited:
Maybe a bit more details on the helpline can help me make the decision. The help line is not completely anonymous. Actually I get an I'd to even track progress. I give my details but the third party only reveals for legal reasons. Will this hold for EEOC ? I won't say I didn't do anything - I did present an oppy for them to correct. There is still a chance my manager can still guess who may have made the complaint.
 
Since this issue has several co-workers as well... Can a letter be given to the HR stating the facts of what is happening? Without anyone providing their name? Then HR would be (should be) looking into this issue in general. This would take the pressure off the OP. Then it would still allow the OP to go forward with a claim at EEOC if the HR dept doesn't look into the issue.
 
What is the purpose of the ethics line? How are they related to your employer and what exactly do they do?
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top