Discrimination in Recruitment

 

Despite additional rules and procedures, recruiting discrimination continues to be a global issue. According to the International Labor Organization, anti-discrimination legislation is ineffective, which is why employment discrimination, including recruiting discrimination, persists around the world (Hennekam, et al., 2018).

Discrimination appears to be a continuous issue in many companies. Organizations must follow discrimination prevention rules and procedures, both internal and external. However, studies have shown that these external factors just mitigate the effects of job prejudice rather than completely eliminating it (Mcginnity, et al., 2009). Organizations can discriminate in both overt and covert ways, with subtle versions becoming more widespread in reaction to anti-discrimination legislation and regulations. It is critical to acknowledge that overt forms of discrimination continue to exist (Adamovic, 2020).

Discrimination against candidates with Arabic names is most common at the start of the hiring process, when companies decide whether or not to request a candidate's entire CV. They noticed that when an employer saw an Arabic name, they frequently rejected the applicant altogether. This exemplifies the concept of employers conducting "lexicographic searches" (Behtoui & Neergaard, 2009).

Discrimination in the hiring process has major consequences for both the organizations and the individuals concerned. Perceived discrimination, defined as the subjective perception that one experiences bias, has a negative influence on an individual's well-being, physical health, and self-esteem (Hennekam, et al., 2018). Depression, stress, and anxiety all rise. Furthermore, perceptions of discrimination have been found to be negatively connected with attitudes toward the workplace, including lower organizational commitment, poorer job performance, and higher exit rates. These negative consequences affect organizations as well. Recruitment prejudice directly prohibits organizations from employing the best candidate, which has less-than-ideal consequences (Mcginnity, et al., 2009).

 

Despite the fact that businesses are aware of the legislation prohibiting workplace discrimination, there are a variety of reasons why some employees may nevertheless engage in it. Taste discrimination is one sort of prejudice in which people have an aversion to other members of a certain social group based on specific qualities such as gender or race. Using the theories of affinity, social identity, and similarity-attraction, it has been claimed that managers in firms who make hiring decisions occasionally favor persons who appear to belong to the same social group as themselves (Behtoui & Neergaard, 2009).

Source: (Navaratne, 2019)

Furthermore, when it comes to recruiting minorities, such as individuals with disabilities, objectives may differ from actual recruitment processes at times (Adamovic, 2020). Second, statistical discrimination asserts that people may hold unfavorable prejudices about a specific social group as a whole (e.g., all older workers are slower), which may influence employment decisions when dealing with individuals who belong to the designated social group. Stereotypes, which are described as generic views about features held by members of specific social groups, also influence work choices (Hennekam, et al., 2018).

Although it is assumed that an in-depth review of a job application will result in the best hiring decision, such an evaluation typically does not take place due to a lack of time and resources. Instead, individuals in charge of hiring will look for obvious criteria, such as a candidate's age or race. Stereotypes become mental heuristics that aid in decision-making (Mcginnity, et al., 2009). This is especially possible, according to dual process theories, if a recruiter has minimal information about the prospect throughout the recruiting and selection process. Last but not least, the concept of implicit discrimination posits that people apply prejudices unintentionally, particularly when making a hasty judgment, which is commonly in an uncertain situation (Behtoui & Neergaard, 2009).

Employers frequently lack access to more information about applicants' backgrounds, talents, or experience because discrimination appears to emerge at an early stage of the recruiting process, perpetuating inequalities and discrepancies between majority and minority job seekers. Discrimination during recruitment plainly harms diversity, whereas having a diverse staff might assist firms gain a competitive advantage (Adamovic, 2020).

After determining the type of prejudice, researchers must select jobs (race, gender, age, etc.). When making this decision, researchers should consider both theoretical and practical issues. In practice, researchers should choose a position for which there are multiple job postings and a high demand. As a result, it is prudent to begin by examining the number of job posts on job search engines such as Indeed or SEEK (Adamovic, 2020).

 If a code of conduct is created and followed, it has the potential to reduce discriminatory hiring practices. However, in order to achieve positive results from diversity, responsibility must be developed, and top management must support it (Hennekam, et al., 2018). Raising people's knowledge of potential discriminatory hiring practices, holding them accountable for their actions, and fostering an ethical workplace culture are all critical steps in reducing discriminatory hiring practices.

References

Adamovic, M., 2020. Analyzing discrimination in recruitment: A guide and best practices for resume studies. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28(1).

Behtoui, A. & Neergaard, A., 2009. Perceptions of Discrimination in Recruitment and the Workplace. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 7(4), pp. 347-369.

Hennekam, S., Peterson, J., Tahssain, L. & Dumazert, J.-P., 2018. Recruitment discrimination: how organizations use social power to circumvent laws and regulations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 32(10).

Mcginnity, F., Nelson, J. K., Lunn, P. & Quinn, E., 2009. Discrimination in Recruitment: Evidence from a Field Experiment. The Equality Authority and The Economic and Social Research Institute.