Company on the hook for third-party staffer’s bias
September 30, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: In This Week's E-Newsletter, Latest News & Views, Law
Here’s another thing to keep in mind when using third-party staffing firms: Keep an eye on their practices to make sure they aren’t breaking the law — and putting you in the hot seat.
A real estate company used an independent contractor to interview and hire employees to show apartments. One of the candidates chosen for an interview was a 44-year-old man.
During the interview, the contractor allegedly told him he was “too old” for the job and turned him down. The candidate sued the company for age discrimination.
The company argued it couldn’t be held liable, because the biased decision was made by a contractor, not by anyone within the company.
But the court didn’t buy it. It ruled that the company’s responsibility for what happens during its hiring process, whether interviews are conducted and decisions are made by management and HR, or the process is outsourced to a third party.
Cite: Halpert v. Manhattan Apartments
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Another crazy ruling! So I guess if I ship something FedEx and the driver gets drunk and wrecks, then myself and everyone else who has a package on the truck is liable now.
When can we get back to the time when you are responsible for YOUR actions. Unless the company who hired the recruiter told them not to hire older people then I just don’t see any fault in their actions. When I have a company tell me not to hire someone based on race or age (yes it happens) the first words out of my mouth are why? Next is generally I can’t help you.
October 4th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
It’s not a crazy ruling. The 3rd party was hired as an agent of the company to do work for them. In that regard, the 3rd party is an extension of that company; the company is responsible for who they hire to do work for them whether a contractor of not. How far back do you want to go? Wanna go back to the days of separate toilets and lunchrooms ? And why did those conditions stop? Not because all of a sudden businesses/societies got a conscientious & put a stop to it because they thought it was the wrong thing to do–oh, no–they put a stop to it because they were forced to through legislation.
October 5th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Thanks Michelle.
The more amazing thing is that the company thought for even a moment that hiring a third party to do their hiring absolved them of responsibility.
Of course, they do have the option of suing the independent contractor or bringing them into the lawsuit.