Ethics and Discrimination

Example of Response to Gender Stereotyping:

In fact, a corporate coaching program exists for women who are considered to be “bullies” called “Bully
Broads.” The program is designed to help women to understand how their conception of what it takes
to get ahead (often learned through interactions with men) might cause others with whom they work to
consider them to be bullies. Can you imagine a similar program for men? Probably not. Aggressive men
are viewed as going after what they want, not letting anything get in their way, and so on.

Example of Race Issues:

Without diminishing the impact of overt acts of discrimination or their continuation in the workplace,
covert forms of discrimination are also widely prevalent though often go unnoticed. For instance,
University of Chicago scholars Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Millainathan found that there remains
discrimination simply on the basis of one’s name.[1] In order to determine the extent of discrimination
in the labor market on the basis of the racial sound of a name, these researchers answered help-wanted
ads in Boston and Chicago newspapers by submitting resumes. The resumes were all exactly the same in
their substance; they were different only in the names attached to them. This change produced major
differences in the number of callbacks received for each resume. Names that were traditionally
associated with Caucasians (such as Jill, Allison, Neil and Brad) drew 50 % more callbacks than did those
traditionally associated with African Americans (such as Aisha, Ebony, Tremayne and Leroy). Even when
the researchers increased the quality of the resumes, higher quality resumes from African American-
sounding candidates received no more callbacks than the original resume. The only bright spot in the
research was the finding that Chicago employers in African American neighborhoods discriminated less
than those in other communities.

Moreover, we often do not recognize areas of Western culture that contain or perpetuate covert
discrimination. In her article, “White Privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack,”[2] Peggy McIntosh
identifies a number of daily conditions on which a white person in Western society can count on in
connection with their daily living, she explains that this privilege is like “an invisible weightless knapsack
of provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools and blank checks.” as the privileges
include:

• I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or
harassed.

• I can open a newspaper or turn on the television and see people of my race represented
positively.

• I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

• I am never asked to speak for all of the people in my racial group.

[1] Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Millainathan, “Are Emily and Brendan more employable than Lakisha
and Jamal?” Univ. of Chicago, Graduate School of Business, unpublished paper (11/18/02).

[2] Peggy McIntosh, “White Privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack,” Peace and Freedom
(July/August 1989), pp. 10-12.
Avoiding Discrimination in Workplace Wellness
Programs
September 16, 2013 by Ask EARN Staff

By Ellice Switzer Technical Assistance Specialist, EARN

The proliferation of workplace wellness programs [1] in recent years has

brought a variety of positive changes for employers and employees. Many
employers offer incentives to employees who reach certain health milestones
such as weight loss or smoking cessation, citing an established relationship
between wellness and productivity[2].  However, employers should consider
their wellness programs in relation to several key employment and civil rights
laws to avoid unintentional discriminatory practices in wellness offerings. This
is particularly true of wellness program incentives that are tied to group health
plan coverage and those which include health risk assessments or biometric
testing[3].
 Source: Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits, 2012

    There are several laws that have implications for employers who offer
wellness programs. Among them:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act)
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA)
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
To date, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has not
issued specific guidance to employers in relation to the intersection of
wellness programs and the ADA, but in a recent meeting, the Commission
stressed that wellness programs need to be created and offered in a way that
does not put the employer at risk of violating equal employment opportunity
laws. It is especially important that employers are able to accurately define
whether or not a wellness program would be considered “voluntary” under the
law, in order to avoid legal pitfalls. The implementation of the Affordable Care
Act will continue to spur the proliferation of workplace wellness programs.
The final rules regarding the Affordable Care Act and wellness program
incentives, which were issued jointly by the Departments of Labor, Health and
Human Services (HHS) and the Treasury, provide requirements for wellness
programs offered through employment-based group health plan coverage. 
Among the requirements for health-contingent wellness programs, these rules
state that programs must be “reasonably designed” and employers must offer
a “reasonable alternative” to obtaining the full reward for employees who do
not meet the initial “health-contingent” standard.  Visit EBSA’s website to
access the complete regulations at www.dol.gov/ebsa/healthreform. Title I of
GINA, which generally prohibits discrimination in employment-based group
health plan coverage, is administered by the Departments of Labor, HHS, and
Treasury.  Title II of GINA, which prohibits discrimination in employment
based on genetic information, is administered by the EEOC. Employers
should also be careful to ensure compliance with GINA if collecting
information related to family history which would include genetic information
and could expose the employer to potential GINA violations. Employers
should consider adding a GINA disclosure to any Health Reimbursement
Arrangement (HRA), and ensure that protected health information cannot be
accessed by managers and supervisors. The GINA disclosure should inform
employees that they are not required to disclose genetic information regarding
themselves or their dependents, and that any disclosure of health information
is completely voluntary.  Giving thoughtful care and consideration to practices
and policies around workplace wellness programs will help to maximize
employee access and benefit from the program, while limiting risk to the
employer.

[1] Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits, 2012:

http://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/8345-employer-
health-benefits-annual-survey-section-12-0912.pdf

[2] Baicker, K., Cutler, D., & Song, Z. (2010). Workplace wellness programs
can generate savings. Health Affairs, 29(2), 304-311.

[3] JoAnn Volk, & Sabrina Corlette. (2012). Premium Incentives to Drive

Wellness in the Workplace: A Review of the Issues and Recommendations for
Policymakers.