In terms of analyzing applicant data, do public and private employers use the same yard-stick?

(by Biddle Consulting Group's Marife Ramos, Director of Operations - EEO/AA, and John Piatt, Director EEO/AA - O & CR)

The final Internet Applicant Rule became effective February 6, 2006, one-hundred and twenty days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. While the rule did not apply retroactively to hiring decisions made prior to February 6, 2006 a contractor must have made provisions in their hiring processes to track detailed demographic information about Internet Applicants and retain the records for further analyses after February 6, 2006.

The passing of this rule has cost federal contractors hundreds of millions of dollars in time, development of changes in management in processes/procedures, training and the implementation of costly applicant tracking systems.  It also provided the OFCCP with in-roads into mountains of federal contractor employment data in the private sector and has become their stall-worth for identifying discrimination and obtaining back pay and restitution for individuals affected by discriminatory hiring practices.
 
Have you ever wondered: “If federal contractors are expected to collect, maintain, and analyze employee and transactions data as required by the E.O. 11246, are public agencies also subject to the same expectations? When federal contractors fail to address the requirements of the regulations, there are financial/reporting consequences on the part of the contractors. How about the public agencies, what type of consequences do they face when they fail to address the reporting requirements?”

Below is an excerpt from an annual report from the EEOC (http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/reports/fsp2010_2/index.cfm#ID). In this report, it states that public agencies, through MD-715, are also required to provide comprehensive employment data (particularly applicants for new hires and promotions) to the EEOC on a yearly basis. Yet, only 22% of the public agencies collect the necessary applicant data; (although this is already about a 4% increase from last year’s turn-out). This report will make one wonder: “is the stick from which employers are measured the same for all?”

“22% of Agencies Collect Applicant Flow Data

EEOC's regulations provide that each agency shall establish a system to collect and maintain accurate employment information on the race, national origin, sex and [disabilities] of its employees . . . .[and] use the data . . . in studies and analyses which contribute affirmatively to achiev[e] the objectives of the equal employment opportunity program. 29 C.F.R. §114.601(a) and (e). Section II(E) of MD-715 establishes that a model EEO program must maintain a system that tracks applicant flow data, which identifies applicants by race, national origin, sex and disability status and the disposition of all applications.

The MD-715 report tables currently require agencies to report applicant flow data for new hires and internal competitive promotions in major occupations, for internal selections to Senior Level positions and for participation in career development.

In FY 2010, 42 (22%) of the 192 agencies and subcomponents that submitted MD-715 data, reported collecting comprehensive applicant flow data, up from 33 (18.33%) of the 180 agencies and subcomponents, that submitted MD-715 data, reporting comprehensive applicant flow data in FY 2009. Figure 7 below shows the percentage of agencies that collected comprehensive applicant data on an annual basis. See Appendix III for a detailed list of agencies' status.”