This study reports on the results of a content analysis of federal court cases examining employment discrimination litigation in private, federal, and state/local sector organizations. One objective was to determine whether there are differences in the types of employment discrimination claims (e.g. race, sex, age, and disability) across the different sectors. A second objective was to determine whether there are differences in the outcomes (whether the case outcome or ruling was for the plaintiff or the defendant) of the different types of employment discrimination cases across the different sectors. The results of this study indicate that there are substantial differences in both the types of discrimination charges and the outcomes of those discrimination charges across the different sectors. The implications of the most significant findings are discussed, and recommendations are offered to organizations interested in reducing the occurrence of employment discrimination and the costs associated with employment discrimination litigation.

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE The seemingly increasing political divide in the United States between Democrats and Republicans has often resulted in both parties working to advance their ideology rather than forge a consensus with the other side. This polarization can often be seen in the geography of the nation which can characterize most of the states as either solidly “red” (Republican/conservative) or “blue” (Democratic/liberal). With federal judges appointed by the President and confirmed by members of Congress, one wonders if these politically appointed judges reflect in their rulings the ideology of those who appointed/confirmed them and/or if the “color” of the state in which they preside has any bearing on the number of cases brought before them. In a random sample of federal employment discrimination cases (n=657), this study sought to examine the influence of geographic location and the political ideology/leanings of states may have on both the frequency and outcomes of employment discrimination claims. The results revealed noteworthy and significant differences between states in both the frequency (more or less cases than would be expected to be filed based on relative population size) and degree of plaintiff success/failure in such cases. As a result of these findings, implications are advanced for employees and employers as a consequence of these geographic and political differences. /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:Table Normal; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Times New Roman; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

PurposeThis study aims to examine whether the demographics of the US federal judiciary and the type of employment discrimination charge influence federal employment discrimination case outcomes.Design/methodology/approachThe outcomes of 401 randomly selected employment discrimination cases were examined by utilizing chi square analysis to test the interaction effects of race and gender along with four different charges of employment discrimination.FindingsThe findings suggest that the outcomes of employment discrimination cases are a function of the interaction of the judges' gender and race along with the type of discrimination charge (e.g. gender, race, age, or disability discrimination) involved in the case.Research limitations/implicationsMore research studies with larger cell sample sizes for certain discrimination claims should be conducted to ascertain the validity of the current results.Practical implicationsPotential litigants in employment discrimination cases (both plaintiffs and defendants) may find these results relevant in determining their chances for success in the courtroom.Social implicationsThese findings could help judges become more aware of potential biases and help guard against being influenced by them. These findings may also have implications for the selection and appointment of judges and suggest that judicial bodies that are more diverse may render more unbiased rulings.Originality/valuePrevious research regarding the influence of the sex and race of the judge on court case outcomes has yielded contradictory and confusing findings. However, by controlling for the possible influence of the type of charge involved in the cases, the findings of the current study suggest that judges' rulings are a function of the interaction of the judges' demographic characteristics with the type of discrimination charge.

The purpose of this paper is to show that the use of evidence-based information from academic research regarding HRM practices can have a positive impact on an organization's degree of competitiveness.This article explains how the use of academic information sources results in greater organizational performance.Some supporting empirical research findings are briefly reviewed.We then propose how the use of evidence-based information in HRM practices can improve global operations.Different sources of academic research information are identified and described.Some specific recommendations for accessing and using academic research information are offered.Finally, a brief summary and some general conclusions are provided.

Purpose - This study aims to examine whether the diversity of the US federal judiciary has an influence on case outcomes in employment discrimination cases. Specifically, this paper investigates if the gender and race of both judges and plaintiffs result in significantly different employment case outcomes in the US district court system.Design/methodology/approach - A random sample of 657 federal employment discrimination cases from the last decade were analyzed utilizing chi square analysis testing combinatory and interaction effects of race and gender. Findings - The results intimate that the demographic characteristics of judges and plaintiffs do have an effect on case outcomes. Specifically that different combinatory types and interactions of judges and plaintiffs are associated with different case outcomes.Practical implications - These results could be useful to potential litigants in employment discrimination cases to assist employees and employers alike in the determination of their chances for success in the courtroom. Judges may also benefit from more information on possible biases and take steps to guard against being influenced by them.Social implications - Such research focuses more attention on the fundamental principle of the American judicial system of fair and equal treatment for all. Furthermore, some findings have implications for the demographic composition of the US Supreme Court and other judiciary bodies where decisions are arrived at by a group.Originality/value - Little to no research has examined the possible differences in case outcomes associated with different combinatory types of both judges and plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases.

The purpose of this study was to provide some empirical data on the characteristics and effects of merit pay plans in higher education institutions. The sample consisted of approximately 500 faculty members from four-year colleges and universities in the U.S. The results of the study suggested that merit pay plans, in general, had a somewhat positive effect on faculty performance levels in the areas of teaching, research, and service. The merit pay plans used by the institutions were also examined and described in terms of their design and implementation characteristics. Analyses suggested that four characteristics may be especially critical to the success of merit pay plans in higher education institutions.

The authors investigated the relative emphasis that educators give to teaching, research, and service in the business discipline and 4 other academic disciplines. The authors also investigated the effects of different faculty activity emphases on faculty teaching effectiveness, research performance, service levels, job and pay satisfaction, attraction, and retention. The sample comprised approximately 500 faculty members from U.S. colleges and universities. Copyright (C) 2008 Heldref Publications

This study provides empirical data on the actual degree of litigation associated with the use of the application form in the employee selection process. More than 300 federal court cases involving the use of the application form were identified and analyzed. Data is presented that shows the relative frequency of litigation associated with different types of application form questions and inquiries. Data is also provided on the court case outcomes associated with the different types of application form inquiries. Additionally, data is presented that shows that certain job and industry types are at greater risk of litigation than others. The findings of this study can be used by organizations that are interested in reducing their risk of exposure to future litigation. Some general recommendations are offered for developing application forms that are both effective and legally sound.

This study surveyed 490 faculty members from colleges and universities throughout the United States. The primary objective of the study was to determine employees' most likely responses to merit pay inequity. The findings indicate that the dominant response to merit pay inequity was quite serious, as most employees would quit their jobs and begin seeking other places to work. The employees' selection and use of various responses was also found to be moderated by age, seniority, tenure status, and salary level. In general, younger, less experienced employees without tenure were more likely to quit and were also more likely to decrease the quality of their output in response to perceived inequity. Employees were also more likely to quit and more likely to decrease the quality of their output in response to perceived inequity when their organizations had relatively lower overall salary levels. The implications of the findings are discussed, and some recommendations for compensation managers are offered.

Most organizations wisely monitor the satisfaction levels of their employees. Job satisfaction, for example, is related to employee motivation and performance (Ostroff, 1992). Job satisfaction is also significantly linked to employee absenteeism (Hackett & Guion, 1985) and turnover (Griffeth, Horn, & Gaertner, 2000). There is even some evidence that job satisfaction positively influences organizational citizenship behavior (Organ & Ryan, 1995). Clearly, job satisfaction is an important organizational variable. Pay satisfaction is a much narrower construct than job satisfaction. However, pay satisfaction is also an important variable that is linked to some rather significant organizational outcomes. For example, some evidence suggests that dissatisfaction with pay may lead to decreased job satisfaction, decreased motivation and performance, increased absenteeism and turnover, and more pay-related grievances and lawsuits (Cable & Judge, 1994; Gerhart & Milkovich, 1990; Huber & Crandall, 1994; Huselid, 1995; Milkovich & Newman, 2002). Job Satisfaction and Pay Satisfaction of Faculty by Discipline and by Region A good deal of empirical research has been conducted on the job satisfaction and pay satisfaction levels of employees in a variety of business settings. Very little empirical research, however, has investigated the job satisfaction and pay satisfaction levels of academic faculty in university settings (Oshagbemi, 2000b; Tang, 1999). Furthermore, no empirical research, to date, has systematically examined possible differences in the satisfaction levels of university faculty as a function of type of academic discipline (e.g., business, education, humanities, sciences, etc.), or as a function of geographic region in the U.S. Potential Moderators of Job Satisfaction and Pay Satisfaction A number of individual-level variables have been examined to see if they exert possible moderating effects on employees' levels of job satisfaction and pay satisfaction. For example, research has been conducted that has investigated whether job satisfaction and pay satisfaction are influenced by sex/gender (Keaveny & Inderrieden, 2000; Mason, 1995; Oshagbemi, 2000a; Oshagbemi, 2000b), age (Kalleberg & Loscocco, 1983; Oshagbemi, 1997; Oshagbemi, 2000a), seniority (Bedeian, Ferris, & Kacmar, 1992), and rank (Oshagbemi, 2000a; Oshagbemi, 2000b). Much of the research regarding the above-mentioned individual-level variables is contradictory and inconclusive. More research conducted in academic settings may help to eventually clarify the nature of the relationship of these individual-level variables to job and pay satisfaction. Organizational-level variables may also exert an influence upon the job satisfaction and pay satisfaction levels of academic faculty. For example, it is possible that the job and pay satisfaction levels of faculty members may be moderated by such variables as size (number of students), whether the institution is public or private, the presence or absence of unionization, and the overall salary level of the university. There is a lack of empirical data on the possible effects of these organizational-level variables on the job and pay satisfaction levels of academic faculty. Some of these variables may prove to be significant moderators of satisfaction levels. We currently know very little about how these variables relate to faculty satisfaction. They may well have an important influence upon the satisfaction levels of faculty in university settings. Research Questions and Objectives The primary research objective of the current study is to provide more empirical data on the job satisfaction and pay satisfaction levels of faculty in university settings. More specifically, this study will explore possible differences in job and pay satisfaction levels of academic faculty as a function of type of academic discipline (e. …

This article discusses a study that surveyed nearly 500 faculty drawn from different disciplines at more than 100 four-year U.S. colleges and universities. The primary purpose of the study was to examine the relative importance of four forms of compensation equity to the pay satisfaction of academic faculty. Procedural equity was found to be the most important form of fairness, followed in order by individual equity, external equity and internal equity. Thus, the perceived fairness of the decision-making processes and procedures that are used to distribute pay appears to be more important to employees than the actual amount of pay they receive. The importance of the equity forms to the overall pay satisfaction of faculty was found to be moderated by gender, age, academic rank, tenure status, institution size and type of discipline. The implications of the current findings for organizational pay policies and practices are discussed.

Employment Relations TodayVolume 28, Issue 4 p. 9-25 New Idea The influence of geographic location on organizations' relative degree of risk of selection discrimination litigation David E. Terpstra, David E. Terpstra College of Business and Public Administration, Eastern Washington UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorR. Bryan Kethley, R. Bryan Kethley College of Business, Middle Tennessee State UniversitySearch for more papers by this author David E. Terpstra, David E. Terpstra College of Business and Public Administration, Eastern Washington UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorR. Bryan Kethley, R. Bryan Kethley College of Business, Middle Tennessee State UniversitySearch for more papers by this author First published: 30 January 2002 https://doi.org/10.1002/ert.10012Citations: 1AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume28, Issue4Winter 2002Pages 9-25 RelatedInformation

This study examined nearly 400 federal court cases in which substantive, or primary, selection devices were legally challenged as being discriminatory. The findings indicated that the relative frequency of occurrence of discrimination charges varied for different types of organizations. Some industry sectors and some job types were associated with a much greater risk of exposure to litigation than others. For example, the government sector appeared to have a relatively high degree of exposure to selection discrimination litigation. The findings also indicated that the outcomes of the federal court cases (whether the ruling was for the defendant/employer or for the plaintiff) varied by industry type, job type, and type of discrimination charge. Specific recommendations are offered to organizations that operate in high risk industry sectors, and that have high risk job types, with an eye toward reducing the possibility of litigation.

: Research toward validation of a comprehensive model mapping personal characteristics onto differentiated job characteristics for effective placement, development, and retention of Navy personnel is described. Increased effectiveness may operate via a more precise multivariate matching of person to job characteristics, resulting in increased psychological, social, and physiological well-being, contentment with the job and work, extra-role behaviors, and effectiveness in tasks and in jobs. Such improved matching should also reduce negative outcomes, thus mitigating intentions to leave. Results from 332 faculty, professionals, and clerical staff indicate differential outcomes can potentially be supported using varied combinations of personal characteristics in conjunction with given job characteristics. Findings generally support continued development and specification of a multivariate model, both for basic theory advancement and specific applications.

This paper reviews the extent of use, reliability, validity, and potential problems of five selection screening devices - reference checks, background investigations, medical exams, drug tests, and polygraph tests. Additionally, federal court cases involving the five devices from 1978 to the present were identified and content analyzed. Data is reported on: 1) the relative frequency of legal challenges associated with the five screening devices, 2) the outcomes of the legal challenges, 3) the types of charges (e. g., race, sex, age, national origin, or handicap) involved in the cases, and 4) the job types and organization types associated with the legal challenges. The results of the study suggest that the use of background investigations and reference checks may be legally risky. Also, protective service positions and city government organizations seem to be relatively more prone to litigation.

A content analysis of US federal court cases was conducted to assess the relative frequency of litigation associated with nine selection devices: 1) unstructured interviews; 2) structured interviews; 3) biographical information blanks; 4) cognitive ability tests; 5) personality tests; 6) honesty tests; 7) physical ability tests; 8) work sample tests; and 9) assessment centers. The outcomes of the cases (whether the devices were ruled to be discriminatory) for each of the nine types of selection devices were also examined. The possible implications of the current findings for organizations and researchers are discussed.

This study used a laboratory experiment with data collected from 84 undergraduate business students to examine the impact of sex, sex-role identity, sex of experimenter, and quality of information on helpless behavior and performance. Although no sex differences were found, results showed sex-role identity differences in learned helplessness and performance. Specifically, when participants were most helpless, androgynous and undifferentiated participants performed at the highest levels. Less helplessness was also experienced when participants were paired with a male experimenter. Consistent with prior research, males tended to make external attributions for failure while females tended to make internal and stable ones. The practical implications of these findings are considered.

Human Resource (HR) executives were surveyed with regard to their perceptions of academic HR research information. In general, the results suggest that HR practitioners' attitudes related to relevance, skepticism, and accessibility are not as negative as was commonly assumed. Still, some specific areas of practitioner concern were identified in the study. The executives' attitudes were also found to be significantly related to specific demographic and organizational variables. Interestingly, HR executives with Ph.D.s had significantly more negative attitudes toward academic research than those without Ph.D.s. Male HR executives also viewed academic research as more irrelevant than their female counterparts. Attitudes also differed significantly as a function of organizational size and type of industry.

The purpose of this study was to identify the reasons why some organizations do not employ certain HRM practices that could increase levels of employee performance and organizational profitability. The focus was on the staffing area (recruitment and selection) of HRM.1 Specifically, this study looked at five staffing practices that the academic research literature has found can significantly increase employee performance levels. Descriptions of these practices, and references supporting their impact on employee performance, are provided in Exhibit 1.