How prevalent are potentially illegal questions during residency interviews?

PURPOSE

To study the prevalence of potentially illegal questions in residency interviews and to identify the impact of such questions on applicants' decisions to rank programs.

METHOD

Using an Electronic Residency Application Service-supported survey, the authors surveyed all applicants from U.S. medical schools to residency programs in five specialties (internal medicine, general surgery, orthopedic surgery, obstetrics-gynecology [OB/GYN], and emergency medicine) in 2006-2007. The survey included questions about the frequency with which respondents were asked about gender, age, marital status, couples matching, current children, intent to have children, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation, and the effect that such questions had on their decision to rank programs.

RESULTS

Of 11,983 eligible applicants, 7,028 (58.6%) completed a survey. Of respondents, 4,557 (64.8%) reported that they were asked at least one potentially illegal question. Questions related to marital status (3,816; 54.3%) and whether the applicant currently had children (1,923; 27.4%) were most common. Regardless of specialty, women were more likely than men to receive questions about their gender, marital status, and family planning (P < .001). Among those respondents who indicated their specialty, those in OB/GYN (162/756; 21.4%) and general surgery (214/876; 24.4%) reported the highest prevalence of potentially illegal questions about gender. Being asked a potentially illegal question negatively affected how respondents ranked that program.

CONCLUSIONS

Many residency applicants were asked potentially illegal questions. Developing a formal interview code of conduct targeting both applicants and programs may be necessary to address the potential flaws in the resident selection process.

The invisible minority: revisiting the debate on foreign-accented speakers and upward mobility in the workplace

Of some of the major types of discrimination, the one that gets the least attention is national origin discrimination and in particular, accent discrimination, especially when it comes to upward mobility in the workplace. Yet, unlike other forms of discrimination, accent discrimination is rarely a subject of any robust public debate. This paper is a modest attempt to help establish a framework for understanding the relative neglect to which the discourse on accent discrimination has been subjected vis-a-vis the overall national debate on diversity. Hopefully, in the process, it will stimulate a more robust conversation on the plight of foreign-accented speakers.

Protection of Freedoms Act 2012: safeguarding vulnerable groups

In last month's article on changes to the law protecting vulnerable adults from harm by health and social care professionals, Richard Griffith and Cassam Tengnah discussed changes to be made to Criminal Records Bureau checks. This month's article discusses the changes to the vetting and barring scheme to be introduced under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which mean that people currently working in regulated activities with vulnerable groups, such as district nurses, will no longer need to register and be monitored by the independent safeguarding authority or its replacement, the Disclosure and Barring Service.

Why don't employers hire and retain workers with disabilities?

INTRODUCTION

Despite persistently low employment rates among working-age adults with disabilities, prior research on employer practices and attitudes toward workers with disabilities paints a generally rosy picture of successfully accommodated workers in a welcoming environment. Findings from previous studies might have been biased because of either employer self-selection or social desirability, yielding non-representative or artificially positive conclusions.

METHODS

In this study, a novel approach was used to survey human resource professionals and supervisors working for employers known or reputed to be resistant to complying with the ADA's employment provisions. Attendees of employer-requested ADA training sessions were asked to assess various possible reasons that employers in general might not hire, retain, or accommodate workers with disabilities and to rate strategies and policy changes that might make it more likely for employers to do so.

RESULTS

As cited by respondents, the principal barriers to employing workers with disabilities are lack of awareness of disability and accommodation issues, concern over costs, and fear of legal liability. With regard to strategies employers might use to increase hiring and retention, respondents identified increased training and centralized disability and accommodation expertise and mechanisms. Public policy approaches preferred by respondents include no-cost external problem-solving, subsidized accommodations, tax breaks, and mediation in lieu of formal complaints or lawsuits.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest straightforward approaches that employers might use to facilitate hiring and retention of workers with disabilities, as well as new public programs or policy changes that could increase labor force participation among working-age adults who have disabilities.

Pride and prejudice: employment discrimination against openly gay men in the United States

This article presents the first large-scale audit study of discrimination against openly gay men in the United States. Pairs of fictitious résumés were sent in response to 1,769 job postings in seven states. One résumé in each pair was randomly assigned experience in a gay campus organization, and the other résumé was assigned a control organization. Two main findings have emerged. First, in some but not all states, there was significant discrimination against the fictitious applicants who appeared to be gay. This geographic variation in the level of discrimination appears to reflect regional differences in attitudes and antidiscrimination laws. Second, employers who emphasized the importance of stereotypically male heterosexual traits were particularly likely to discriminate against openly gay men. Beyond these particular findings, this study advances the audit literature more generally by covering multiple regions and by highlighting how audit techniques may be used to identify stereotypes that affect employment decisions in real labor markets.

Equal-opportunity burden. Legal order for Florida hospital could mean new hiring rules on top of health reform hurdles for thousands of healthcare providers

A judge's decision that a Florida hospital is a federal subcontractor because it provides care through the military's Tricare program has put the industry on alert. Hospitals fear they'll be forced to to jump through lots of hoops to comply with federal rules regarding hiring. "Many of the substantive obligations that are sought to be imposed ... are already fully applicable to hospitals through state and other federal laws," says Curt Kirschner, left, a lawyer with Jones Day.