RSS Feed!

Archives

Archive for November, 2017

Fair Housing News (Nov. 29, 2017)

Wednesday, November 29th, 2017

Dear Colleague,

WASHINGTON – The newest edition of “Programs of HUD” has been posted. It may be found on the HUD.gov public website, and also at this direct link: https://www.hud.gov/hudprograms. This document provides a broad summary of HUD programs, along with the corresponding statutory and regulatory authorities.

People who believe they have experienced discrimination may file a complaint by contacting HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at (800) 669-9777 (voice) or (800) 927-9275 (TTY). Housing discrimination complaints may also be filed by going to hud.gov/fairhousing, or by downloading HUD’s free housing discrimination mobile application, which can be accessed through Apple and Android devices.

November Issue of FTA Transit Safety and Oversight Spotlight Newsletter Now Available (Nov. 2017)

Wednesday, November 29th, 2017

A new issue of the Transit Safety and Oversight Spotlight newsletter is now available.

The November edition includes a recap of the 2017 Joint State Safety Oversight and Rail Transit Agency Workshop, an update on FTA’s Safety Management System pilot at the Chicago Transit Authority, upcoming events and safety training, and more.

Please share the newsletter with colleagues and send comments to FTASafetyStakeholder@dot.gov.

EEOC: Promising Practices for Preventing Workplace Harassment (Nov. 2017)

Tuesday, November 28th, 2017

As many employers recognize, adopting proactive measures may prevent harassment from occurring. Employers implement a wide variety of creative and innovative approaches to prevent and correct harassment.

The Report of the Co-Chairs of EEOC’s Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace (“Report”) identified five core principles that have generally proven effective in preventing and addressing harassment:

Committed and engaged leadership;
Consistent and demonstrated accountability;
Strong and comprehensive harassment policies;
Trusted and accessible complaint procedures; and
Regular, interactive training tailored to the audience and the organization.

The Report includes checklists based on these principles to assist employers in preventing and responding to workplace harassment. The promising practices identified in this document are based primarily on these checklists. Although these practices are not legal requirements under federal employment discrimination laws, they may enhance employers’ compliance efforts.

A. Leadership and Accountability

The cornerstone of a successful harassment prevention strategy is the consistent and demonstrated commitment of senior leaders to create and maintain a culture in which harassment is not tolerated. This commitment may be demonstrated by, among other things:

Clearly, frequently, and unequivocally stating that harassment is prohibited;
Incorporating enforcement of, and compliance with, the organization’s harassment and other discrimination policies and procedures into the organization’s operational framework;
Allocating sufficient resources for effective harassment prevention strategies;
Providing appropriate authority to individuals responsible for creating, implementing, and managing harassment prevention strategies;
Allocating sufficient staff time for harassment prevention efforts;
Assessing harassment risk factors and taking steps to minimize or eliminate those risks; and
Engaging organizational leadership in harassment prevention and correction efforts.

In particular, we recommend that senior leaders ensure that their organizations:

Have a harassment policy that is comprehensive, easy to understand, and regularly communicated to all employees;
Have a harassment complaint system that is fully resourced, is accessible to all employees, has multiple avenues for making a complaint, if possible, and is regularly communicated to all employees;
Regularly and effectively train all employees about the harassment policy and complaint system;
Regularly and effectively train supervisors and managers about how to prevent, recognize, and respond to objectionable conduct that, if left unchecked, may rise to the level of prohibited harassment;
Acknowledge employees, supervisors, and managers, as appropriate, for creating and maintaining a culture in which harassment is not tolerated and promptly reporting, investigating, and resolving harassment complaints; and
Impose discipline that is prompt, consistent, and proportionate to the severity of the harassment and/or related conduct, such as retaliation, when it determines that such conduct has occurred.

In addition, we recommend that senior leaders exercise appropriate oversight of the harassment policy, complaint system, training, and any related preventive and corrective efforts, which may include:

Periodically evaluating the effectiveness of the organization’s strategies to prevent and address harassment, including reviewing and discussing preventative measures, complaint data, and corrective action with appropriate personnel;
Ensuring that concerns or complaints regarding the policy, complaint system, and/or training are addressed appropriately;
Directing staff to periodically, and in different ways, test the complaint system to determine if complaints are received and addressed promptly and appropriately; and
Ensuring that any necessary changes to the harassment policy, complaint system, training, or related policies, practices, and procedures are implemented and communicated to employees.

To maximize effectiveness, senior leaders could seek feedback about their anti-harassment efforts. For example, senior leaders could consider:

Conducting anonymous employee surveys on a regular basis to assess whether harassment is occurring, or is perceived to be tolerated; and
Partnering with researchers to evaluate the organization’s harassment prevention strategies.

B. Comprehensive and Effective Harassment Policy

A comprehensive, clear harassment policy that is regularly communicated to all employees is an essential element of an effective harassment prevention strategy. A comprehensive harassment policy includes, for example:

A statement that the policy applies to employees at every level of the organization, as well as to applicants, clients, customers, and other relevant individuals;
An unequivocal statement that harassment based on, at a minimum, any legally protected characteristic is prohibited;
An easy to understand description of prohibited conduct, including examples;
A description of any processes for employees to informally share or obtain information about harassment without filing a complaint;
A description of the organization’s harassment complaint system, including multiple (if possible), easily accessible reporting avenues;
A statement that employees are encouraged to report conduct that they believe may be prohibited harassment (or that, if left unchecked, may rise to the level of prohibited harassment), even if they are not sure that the conduct violates the policy;
A statement that the employer will provide a prompt, impartial, and thorough investigation;
A statement that the identity of individuals who report harassment, alleged victims, witnesses, and alleged harassers will be kept confidential to the extent possible and permitted by law, consistent with a thorough and impartial investigation;
A statement that employees are encouraged to respond to questions or to otherwise participate in investigations regarding alleged harassment;
A statement that information obtained during an investigation will be kept confidential to the extent consistent with a thorough and impartial investigation and permitted by law;
An assurance that the organization will take immediate and proportionate corrective action if it determines that harassment has occurred; and
An unequivocal statement that retaliation is prohibited, and that individuals who report harassing conduct, participate in investigations, or take any other actions protected under federal employment discrimination laws will not be subjected to retaliation.

In addition, effective written harassment policies are, for example:

Written and communicated in a clear, easy to understand style and format;
Translated into all languages commonly used by employees;
Provided to employees upon hire and during harassment trainings, and posted centrally, such as on the company’s internal website, in the company handbook, near employee time clocks, in employee break rooms, and in other commonly used areas or locations; and
Periodically reviewed and updated as needed, and re-translated, disseminated to staff, and posted in central locations.

C. Effective and Accessible Harassment Complaint System

An effective harassment complaint system welcomes questions, concerns, and complaints; encourages employees to report potentially problematic conduct early; treats alleged victims, complainants, witnesses, alleged harassers, and others with respect; operates promptly, thoroughly, and impartially; and imposes appropriate consequences for harassment or related misconduct, such as retaliation.

For example, an effective harassment complaint system:

Is fully resourced, enabling the organization to respond promptly, thoroughly, and effectively to complaints;
Is translated into all languages commonly used by employees;
Provides multiple avenues of complaint, if possible, including an avenue to report complaints regarding senior leaders;
Is responsive to complaints by employees and by other individuals on their behalf;
May describe the information the organization requests from complainants, even if complainants cannot provide it all, including: the alleged harasser(s), alleged victim(s), and any witnesses; the date(s) of the alleged harassment; the location(s) of the alleged harassment; and a description of the alleged harassment;
May include voluntary alternative dispute resolution processes to facilitate communication and assist in preventing and addressing prohibited conduct, or conduct that could eventually rise to the level of prohibited conduct, early;
Provides prompt, thorough, and neutral investigations;
Protects the privacy of alleged victims, individuals who report harassment, witnesses, alleged harassers, and other relevant individuals to the greatest extent possible, consistent with a thorough and impartial investigation and with relevant legal requirements;
Includes processes to determine whether alleged victims, individuals who report harassment, witnesses, and other relevant individuals are subjected to retaliation, and imposes sanctions on individuals responsible for retaliation;
Includes processes to ensure that alleged harassers are not prematurely presumed guilty or prematurely disciplined for harassment; and
Includes processes to convey the resolution of the complaint to the complainant and the alleged harasser and, where appropriate and consistent with relevant legal requirements, the preventative and corrective action taken.

We recommend that organizations ensure that the employees responsible for receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints or otherwise implementing the harassment complaint system, among other things:

Are well-trained, objective, and neutral;
Have the authority, independence, and resources required to receive, investigate, and resolve complaints appropriately;
Take all questions, concerns, and complaints seriously, and respond promptly and appropriately;
Create and maintain an environment in which employees feel comfortable reporting harassment to management;
Understand and maintain the confidentiality associated with the complaint process; and
Appropriately document every complaint, from initial intake to investigation to resolution, use guidelines to weigh the credibility of all relevant parties, and prepare a written report documenting the investigation, findings, recommendations, and disciplinary action imposed (if any), and corrective and preventative action taken (if any).

D. Effective Harassment Training

Leadership, accountability, and strong harassment policies and complaint systems are essential components of a successful harassment prevention strategy, but only if employees are aware of them. Regular, interactive, comprehensive training of all employees may help ensure that the workforce understands organizational rules, policies, procedures, and expectations, as well as the consequences of misconduct.

Harassment training may be most effective if it is, among other things:

Championed by senior leaders;
Repeated and reinforced regularly;
Provided to employees at every level and location of the organization;
Provided in a clear, easy to understand style and format;
Provided in all languages commonly used by employees;
Tailored to the specific workplace and workforce;
Conducted by qualified, live, interactive trainers, or, if live training is not feasible, designed to include active engagement by participants; and
Routinely evaluated by participants and revised as necessary.

In addition, harassment training may be most effective when it is tailored to the organization and audience. Accordingly, when developing training, the daily experiences and unique characteristics of the work, workforce, and workplace are important considerations.

Effective harassment training for all employees includes, for example:

Descriptions of prohibited harassment, as well as conduct that if left unchecked, might rise to the level of prohibited harassment;
Examples that are tailored to the specific workplace and workforce;
Information about employees’ rights and responsibilities if they experience, observe, or become aware of conduct that they believe may be prohibited;
Encouragement for employees to report harassing conduct;
Explanations of the complaint process, as well as any voluntary alternative dispute resolution processes;
Explanations of the information that may be requested during an investigation, including: the name or a description of the alleged harasser(s), alleged victim(s), and any witnesses; the date(s) of the alleged harassment; the location(s) of the alleged harassment; and a description of the alleged harassment;
Assurance that employees who report harassing conduct, participate in investigations, or take any other actions protected under federal employment discrimination laws will not be subjected to retaliation;
Explanations of the range of possible consequences for engaging in prohibited conduct;
Opportunities to ask questions about the training, harassment policy, complaint system, and related rules and expectations; and
Identification and provision of contact information for the individual(s) and/or office(s) responsible for addressing harassment questions, concerns, and complaints.

Because supervisors and managers have additional responsibilities, they may benefit from additional training. Employers may also find it helpful to include non-managerial and non-supervisory employees who exercise authority, such as team leaders.

Effective harassment training for supervisors and managers includes, for example:

Information about how to prevent, identify, stop, report, and correct harassment, such as:
Identification of potential risk factors for harassment and specific actions that may minimize or eliminate the risk of harassment;
Easy to understand, realistic methods for addressing harassment that they observe, that is reported to them, or that they otherwise learn of;
Clear instructions about how to report harassment up the chain of command; and
Explanations of the confidentiality rules associated with harassment complaints;
An unequivocal statement that retaliation is prohibited, along with an explanation of the types of conduct that are protected from retaliation under federal employment discrimination laws, such as:

Complaining or expressing an intent to complain about harassing conduct;
Resisting sexual advances or intervening to protect others from such conduct; and
Participating in an investigation about harassing conduct or other alleged discrimination; and
Explanations of the consequences of failing to fulfill their responsibilities related to harassment, retaliation, and other prohibited conduct.

To help prevent conduct from rising to the level of unlawful workplace harassment, employers also may find it helpful to consider and implement new forms of training, such as workplace civility or respectful workplace training and/or bystander intervention training. In addition, employers may find it helpful to meet with employees as needed to discuss issues related to current or upcoming events and to share relevant resources.

The complete report is available here.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Litigation Briefs (Nov. 2017)

Monday, November 20th, 2017

November 7, 2017

CON ED TO PAY $800,000 TO SETTLE EEOC DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION SUIT: Utility Giant Refused to Hire Applicants Due to Their Disabilities, Federal Agency Charged

NEW YORK – Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., the utility that provides electrical and gas service to New York City and Westchester County, will pay $800,000 and furnish other relief to resolve a disability discrimination suit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.

According to the EEOC’s complaint, the company’s doctors refused to medically approve quali-fied applicants to begin employment because of their disabilities, even though they could perform the jobs for which they applied. The company also performed medical examinations of applicants without giving them a conditional job offer first. Finally, the company’s doctors imposed improper medical restrictions on some existing employees with disabilities that reduced their earnings, and in one case led to termin¬ation, the EEOC said.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) prohibits discrimination in hiring and terms and conditions of employment based on disability. This includes refusing to hire applicants because of their disabilities when they can perform the essential functions of the job with or without a reasonable accommodation. Additionally, an employer may not ask applicants disability-related questions and may not conduct medical examinations until after it makes a conditional job offer to the applicant. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (EEOC v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Civil Action No.17-cv-7390), after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

Under the consent decree settling the suit, the company will pay the job applicants and employees who were discriminated against $800,000 in lost wages and damages. The decree also requires that Con Ed give a written job offer before it conducts any pre-hire medical examination. Under the decree, Con Ed must make an individualized assessment of each applicant’s ability to perform the job and will raise the threshold for its doctors to place disability-related restrictions on applicants and employees.

“The EEOC appreciates Con Ed’s willingness to resolve this case without protracted litigation,” said Jeffrey Burstein, the EEOC’s regional attorney for the New York District Office. “The agency remains committed to enforcing federal law to ensure that people with disabilities do not face discrim-inatory barriers to full and equal participation in the workforce.”

EEOC New York District Director Kevin Berry said, “Congress passed the ADA to protect Americans with disabilities from adverse employment actions based on fears and myths about their conditions. We applaud Con Ed’s willingness to change its hiring procedures to ensure that disabled applicants are given a fair and equal opportunity to work for them.”

The EEOC’s New York District Office is responsible for processing discrimination charges, administrative enforcement and the conduct of agency litigation in New York, northern New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine.

The EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

November 15, 2017

SPEC FORMLINERS TO PAY $105,000 TO SETTLE EEOC EQUAL PAY LAWSUIT: Female Sales Representative Was Paid Less Than Her Male Coworker, Federal Agency Charged

LOS ANGELES — Spec Formliners, Inc., a Santa Ana, Calif.-based business, will pay $105,000 and provide other relief to settle an equal pay lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.

According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Spec Formliners paid a female sales representative less than a male sales representative in base pay. The EEOC also contended that the company required the female sales representative to sell more to earn the same commission as her male colleague.

Such alleged conduct violates the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed its lawsuit on Nov. 17, 2016 in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (EEOC v. Spec Formliners, Inc., Case No. 8:16-cv-02066-BRO-AJW) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

As part of the consent decree settling the suit, Spec Formliners will pay $105,000 to the former employee. In addition to the monetary relief, Spec Formliners also agreed to retain external equal emp-loyment opportunity consultants who will assist the company in creating, reviewing and revising its policies and practices to ensure compliance with Title VII and the EPA. The external EEO consul¬tants will also assist the company in conducting fair pay audits, reviewing and revising its recruitment prac-tices, and preparing annual reports for the EEOC on the company’s progress. Spec Formliners further agreed to conduct anti-discrimination training and distribute the revised policies to all employees. The EEOC will monitor Spec Formliners’ progress with the 2.5-year decree.

“We commend Spec Formliners for agreeing to put measures in place that will help remove barriers for female sales representatives and ensure equal pay for equal work,” said Anna Park, regional attorney of the EEOC’s Los Angeles District, which includes Orange County in its jurisdiction. “Employees will do their best work when they know that their efforts are fairly compensated.”

Rosa Viramontes, director of the agency’s Los Angeles District Office, added, “The changes that will be implemented as part of this settlement will ensure that female sales representatives will receive fair compensation for sales equal to those of their male counterparts. This not only benefits female employees, but also the company as a whole.”

According to the company’s website, www.specformliners.com, Spec Formliners creates and customizes form liner patterns for concrete projects.

Enforcement of equal pay laws and targeting compensation systems and practices is one of the six national priorities identified by the Commission’s Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP).

The EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

November 14, 2017

STRATAFORCE SETTLES EEOC DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT: Company Required Applicants to Complete an Unlawful Pre-Offer Health Questionnaire, Federal Agency Charged

INDIANAPOLIS - Strataforce, a staffing firm with offices in California, Indiana, North Carolina, and South Carolina, agreed to resolve a lawsuit by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging that the company made pre-offer health inquiries of applicants in violation of federal law.

According to EEOC’s lawsuit, Strataforce asked applicants to complete an application package that included a detailed medical questionnaire before the company offered the applicant a position or placement. The medical questionnaires asked for sensitive health information, and included numerous disability-related questions. Employers are generally prohibited from making pre-offer medical inquiries and refusing to hire qualified individuals with disabilities by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

EEOC filed suit against Strataforce in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division (EEOC v. Workforce Integration Inc d/b/a Strataforce, Case No. 1:17-cv-4104, S.D. Ind.) on Nov. 6, 2017. The parties reached agreement and filed a joint motion to approve a consent judgment on November 7. The motion was approved by the Court and the Consent Judgment was entered on November 13. Under the Consent Judgment, Strataforce will be required to provide notice to applicants of their rights under the ADA and submit annual compliance reports to the Commission during the Judgment’s four-year term.

“Congress recognized that prohibiting pre-offer medical inquiries was necessary to prevent applicants from being subjected to harmful and unfounded stereotypes on the basis of an actual or perceived disability,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Kenneth Bird. “As staffing agencies now play a large role in our nation’s workforce, eliminating any discrimination in their screening practices is increasingly important to ensuring that workers with disabilities have equal access to work opportunities. Here, EEOC’s investigation showed Strataforce has hired many individuals with disabilities, and we are pleased that in the future Strataforce will conduct its hiring processes in compliance with the ADA. I commend Strataforce for entering an early resolution of the case.”

Eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring is one of six national priorities identified by EEOC’s Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP). These barriers can include exclusionary policies and practices, restrictive application processes, and the use of screening tools such as pre-employment tests, background checks and medical questionnaires.

The Indianapolis District Office’s jurisdiction includes Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, and parts of Ohio. The EEOC is the federal government agency responsible for enforcing federal anti-discrimination laws in the workplace. Further information about EEOC is available on the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

Fair Housing News (Nov. 2017)

Friday, November 17th, 2017

Dear Colleague,

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced today it is charging the owner and landlord of several rental properties in Wichita, Kansas, and his wife, who co-owned one of the properties, with housing discrimination after the landlord allegedly sexually harassed two female tenants at his properties. HUD’s charge further alleges that he also made discriminatory statements based on one of the women’s race. Read HUD’s charge here.

The Fair Housing Act makes it illegal to discriminate against individuals on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, or disability. Sexual harassment is a form of illegal sex discrimination.

“Landlords who use their position to intimidate or harass residents or to attempt to trade sexual favors for rent violate the sanctity of a woman’s home, the place where she should feel the safest,” said Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. “HUD is committed to protecting the housing rights of those who are sexually harassed and will continue to take action any time housing providers violate those rights.”

The charge is the result of complaints filed by two female residents alleging that the landlord made unwanted sexual advances toward them, harassed them, made derogatory statements based on race, and evicted them because they refused his advances.

HUD’s charge alleges that the landlord subjected one of the women, who was working as a property manager, to a hostile environment, including entering her apartment uninvited, sexually harassing her, and requesting sex in exchange for allowing her to stay in her unit. The charge also alleges that the landlord told her that he could be her “sugar daddy,” grabbed her buttocks, and made comments about her body to others. On one occasion she awoke to find him in her bedroom on her bed.

The charge further alleges that the landlord subjected a second woman to a hostile environment by making numerous requests for sex when he picked up her rent payments. Once, when she was late paying a portion of her rent, the landlord allegedly asked her if she wanted to have sex with him instead of paying the $150 she owed. When she refused the offer, the landlord allegedly became very upset and immediately wrote her a 3-day notice to vacate.

The charge will be heard by a United States Administrative Law Judge unless any party elects for the case to be heard in federal court. If the administrative law judge finds after a hearing that discrimination has occurred, he may award damages to the complainants for their loss as a result of the discrimination. The judge may also order injunctive relief and other equitable relief, as well as payment of attorney fees. In addition, the judge may impose civil penalties in order to vindicate the public interest.

People who believe they have experienced discrimination may file a complaint by contacting HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at (800) 669-9777 (voice) or (800) 927-9275 (TTY). Housing discrimination complaints may also be filed by going to hud.gov/fairhousing, or by downloading HUD’s free housing discrimination mobile application, which can be accessed through Apple and Android devices.

U.S. Justice Department Announces ADA Title II Settlement Agreement with Louisiana State Penitentiary (Nov. 15, 2017)

Thursday, November 16th, 2017

The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement agreement with the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”).

Under the agreement the Louisiana State Penitentiary (LSP), also known as Angola, will remove barriers to access for inmates, employees, and visitors with disabilities. LSP will increase physical access at a number of facilities on the 28 square mile campus, including the chapels, education buildings, visitor centers, barber shop, dining hall, museum, rodeo complex, recreation yards, and dorms.

LSP also agreed to maintain an ADA coordinator, grievance procedure, work opportunities for inmates with disabilities, and accessible transportation for inmates with mobility disabilities. The agreement has a term of three years.

To read the settlement agreement or to find out more about the ADA, call the Justice Department’s toll-free ADA Information Line at 1-800-514-0301 or 1-800-514-0383 (TTY), or access its www.ada.gov website.

Office of Disability Employment Policy News Brief (Nov. 3, 2017)

Saturday, November 4th, 2017

Secretary Acosta Announces National Apprenticeship Week — November 13-19, 2017
U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta announced that the third annual National Apprenticeship Week will be held November 13-19. Apprenticeships provide demand-driven education, allowing apprentices to earn while they learn, and helping to close the skills gap between the skills job creators seek and job seekers need. Earlier this month, Secretary Acosta announced members of the President’s Task Force on Apprenticeship Expansion. The members of the Task Force, which represents companies, labor unions, trade and industry groups, and educational institutions, will identify strategies and proposals to promote apprenticeships.

Youth Video Features Youth Action Council on Transition
The National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth released a video about the Youth Action Council on Transition. This video presents three cohorts of youth and adult partners who have collaborated through the YouthACT initiative. They share their hopes for other youth, their accomplishments, and their perspectives on working together. YouthACT is a national initiative to get more youth with disabilities and their allies involved as leaders who partner with adults and organizations to improve opportunities for youth to succeed in life.

PEAT Talks: Creative Recruiting Strategies for the Digital Age — November 16
Digital recruitment is key to an effective overall recruiting strategy, but for many, the question is where to begin. In this PEAT Talks webinar, Jessica Miller-Merrell of Xceptional HR Consulting will discuss how recruiters and HR leaders can prioritize their digital recruiting options, and move forward by developing smaller initiatives designed to drive change and establish buy-in. Participants will learn the top five creative recruitment strategies for the digital age, from programmatic ad buying to video recruitment efforts, and how to ensure that these strategies reach all job candidates, including those with disabilities.

PEAT Issues October Newsletter and Guest Blogs
The October newsletter of the Partnership on Employment & Accessible Technology features background on PEAT’s new Buy IT guide to purchasing accessible technology; a new video on accessible technology and the employment lifecycle; and several blog posts and webinar recaps. Among them is a guest blog by the Paciello Group’s Henny Swan exploring “7 Principles of Inclusive Design That Put People First.” Additionally, Deque Systems published an interview this month with PEAT Deputy Project Director Corinne Weible that explored National Disability Employment Awareness Month and its intersection with accessible workplace technology issues.

New ODEP Policies in Practice Profile — Nirath Seri
Nirath Seri is a Senior Consultant at Booz Allen Hamilton. Nirath, who is deaf, supports the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, analyzing workforce barriers and helping create inclusive recruitment, hiring and retention practices for federal employees. Originally from India, Nirath came to Booz Allen Hamilton as part of the Summer Games Challenge, a 10-week competitive program that includes pitch sessions to senior leadership regarding the assistive technology product that her team developed. “Every day is a challenge,” notes Nirath. “Make the most of it and always remember that it is our abilities that count.”

U.S. Department of Justice Immigrant and Employee Rights: 30th Anniversary Newsletter (Nov. 2017)

Saturday, November 4th, 2017

IER 30th Anniversary
Commemorative Edition Newsletter

To cap off IER’s 30th anniversary year, we are issuing a commemorative newsletter. Thank you to our many stakeholders for supporting IER’s mission of enforcing the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, educating the public on this law, and furthering related policy work.

IER+30th+Anniversary+Commemorative+Edition+Newsletter+2017.pdf

U.S. Department of Justice Immigrant and Employee Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division (Nov. 2017)

Thursday, November 2nd, 2017

IMMIGRANT AND EMPLOYEE RIGHTS SECTION (IER) RELEASES VIDEO ON AMENDED REGULATIONS

The video “Changes to INA Sec. 274B Regulations“ covers recent changes to the Immigrant and Employee Rights Section’s (IER) regulations and what these changes mean for the public. The video also discusses resources that can help you learn more about IER’s work and the law that we enforce. Available in English and Spanish.

www.justice.gov/ier

Worker Hotline: 1-800-255-7688
Employer Hotline: 1-800-255-8155
TTY: 1-800-237-2515