Users Guide to the Principles for Professional Conduct
| Index to Ethics Guide |
|---|
Principles for Third-Party Recruiters
3. Compliance with EEO and AA Principles
"Third-party recruiters will follow EEO standards in recruiting activities in a manner that include the following:
- Referring qualified students to employers without regard to the student's race, color, national origin, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability;
- Reviewing selection criteria for adverse impact and screening students based upon job-related criteria only, not based upon the student's race, color, national origin, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability;
- Refusing, in the case of resume referral entities, to permit employers to screen and select resumes based upon the student's race, color, national origin, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability;
- Avoiding use of inquiries that are considered unacceptable by EEO standards during the recruiting process;
- Affirming an awareness of, and sensitivity to, cultural differences and the diversity of the work force;
- Investigating complaints forwarded by the career services office or the employer client regarding EEO noncompliance and seeking resolution of such complaints.
(See Career Services Principle 6, See Employer Principle 6)
(Intent / Rationale / Scenario / Resolution / Resources)
Intent
The recruitment of students from colleges will be carried out in
a manner mirroring the standards of justice in the American employment
system.
Rationale
Inherent in this principle is the notion that employment justice,
as currently defined and implemented by the American court system,
adheres to the notion that (1) hiring must be done in a nondiscriminatory
manner (EEO) and (2) American society has the moral obligation to
remedy the effects of past employment discrimination, known as compensatory
justice. While there is much debate about the merits of affirmative
action, its moral foundation is a basic tenet of this association.
The challenge to third-party recruiters recruiting on college campuses
mirrors the dilemma that in some respect is experienced by any individual
or organization that believes in a just hiring process. Equal employment
opportunity is based on the concept of distributive justice. Distributive
justice, in part, has to do with the way in which economic decisions
are made, which includes hiring, compensation, and promotion. Several
principles can be used to determine the most equitable way in which
to determine the fairness of distributing benefits, most notably
merit. Employees hired or promoted based on merit are viewed as
having done the best, most related work, as well as possessing the
most necessary qualities to perform the tasks required by the position
being filled. Race, gender, age, ethnicity, religion, etc., would
not be seen, except in the rarest of circumstances, as having anything
to do with merit or having a legitimate place as a selection factor.
Affirmative action, on the other hand, is based on a different theory
of justice, namely compensatory justice. This doctrine is
concerned with compensating someone for a past harm or injustice.
Affirmative action programs are aimed, in part, at compensating
minority groups for years of injustice and injury. Under affirmative
action, a candidate’s race and gender may be factored in to the
recruiting and hiring process. Put simply, equal employment opportunity
negates the consideration of race and gender in hiring decisions,
and affirmative action encourages it. The former is based on one
notion of fairness, the latter on a somewhat contradictory one.
It should also be noted that both the private and public sectors
have come to believe that affirmative action is a means of creating
more diversity in their work forces, which is seen as definite benefit
to organizations, even a need. From an organization and, indeed,
a societal standpoint, an effective affirmative action program allows
for greater use of talent, not to mention empowering organizations
to relate more effectively to their diverse clienteles, be their
customers or clients.
At the core of an effective affirmative action program is recruitment,
i.e., attracting the interest of targeted populations. Thus third-party
recruiters in NACE member organizations seeking to meet their affirmative
action goals view campus recruiting as a means of inviting minority
and females to apply, interview, and ultimately accept an offer
of employment. And given their partnership with career services
offices in the recruitment enterprise, third-party recruiters will
ask for cooperation in reaching these students.
Scenario
A third-party recruiter is retained by an client organization that
is seeking to recruit college women and members of minority groups
for a management training program as part of its diversity enhancement
effort.
Resolution
The issue here is not whether or not to court the interest of these
candidates, rather it has to do with how this effort is carried
out. Career services professionals are obliged to provide equal
service and opportunity for all students. But for them to single
out students based on race, ethnicity, or gender is unthinkable.
Thus a "minority only" recruitment effort would not be
supported...nor should it be.
Instead, the third-party recruiter should conceive of a recruitment
effort that encourages minority interest, reaches out to minority
group members, but also is inclusive of all students who
might qualify for the management training program. This effort is
most likely to be successful if it is comprehensive. Advertisement
to students may include wording that encourages minority and female
applicants, while also making it clear that all qualified
applicants are welcomed. The third-party recruiter should ask the
career services office for the names of advisors and officers of
student organizations that contain a critical mass of minority and
female members (e.g., Society of Women Engineers, National Society
of Black Engineers, etc.) so that contacts may be made with these
groups. Asking minority and female faculty in targeted academic
areas to announce the organization’s recruitment efforts and to
encourage their minority and female advisees to consider this employer
would also be a means of this special recruiting effort. Finally,
it would also be ethical to have recent minority and female hires
from this college contact former minority and female classmates
to interest them in the organization.
It should be noted that college career services professionals have
a corresponding obligation to support affirmative action efforts.
They must do so, however, in a way that does not compromise their
obligation to provide equal and full service to all campus constituencies.
Asking the career services professional to single out students or
announce minority- or female-only opportunities is not acceptable,
nor is it likely to be warmly received. Similarly, skirting the
career services office and going directly to faculty in an effort
to have them engage in this sort of activity would not be
in keeping with the ethical standards of the Principles.
Kaplan, Rochelle. "Guess Who’s Coming to Campus: A Guide to Third-Party Recruiters." Journal of Career Planning & Employment, Winter 1999.
Kaplan, Rochelle. "Handling Illegal Questions." Job Choices 2002.
Kaplan, Rochelle. "Stay within the law while building a diverse workplace." Spotlight, September 1, 2000.
NACE. "Employer Nondiscrimination Policy Statement."
NACE Principles for Professional Conduct Committee. "Playing Fair." Job Choices 2002.
NACE Principles for Professional Conduct Committee. "A Faculty Guide to Ethical and Legal Standards in Student Hiring."
Principle
4. Charging Students for Services
