Problem
Case Study: Bazza's Outdoor Apparel - A Case for Discrimination?
Cindy Black has returned to Australia after working for many years in similar roles in Europe and the United States, and has taken over the national manager role in Bazza's Outdoor Apparel (BOA). Bazza's is a successful business originally set up by Barry Smith when he was in his early twenties. Barry was a talented sportsman and outdoor pursuit enthusiast at school. He worked in a local sports store when he left school and his continued passion for outdoor pursuits led him to open his own business. Barry's single store has now expanded to 30 stores around the country. Ten stores are owned outright by Barry and the rest are franchise operations. There is centralised policy setting for the stores, and the company 'image' has been built around the young athletic Australian male all-rounder.
Cindy has become concerned about a number of practices she has observed when she has visited some of the stores in the group. At Head Office, Cindy has observed a lack of HR and anti-discrimination policy and procedure for the organisation. What does exist does not appear to be well communicated to the stores, particularly the franchised operations.
When visiting the distributed stores, Cindy has noticed that each manager follows their own hiring practices. The central policy for recruitment and selection for the company is very vague and many of the staff hiring practices appear to be skewed towards hiring a certain 'look' of person to work in the BOA stores. Cindy has been present when some interviews were conducted in the owned stores, and has noticed that questions relating to a person's religion, activities outside of work and family commitments were being asked. The interview questions asked by managers of the franchise stores differed from those asked by the managers of the owned stores. The managers of the franchise stores particularly appeared to have no training in recruitment and selection and were unaware of any central policy related to the hiring of staff.
Cindy also noticed on her visits to the stores that all front-of-store workers were young Caucasians. Any other workers in the stores from ethnic or minority backgrounds were deliberately confined to working in the store rooms or performing cleaning and stocking functions. When Cindy was approached by a worker from an ethnic background as to why she was unable to 'work her way up to working front of store', she learnt that all of the workers had front-of-store experience except those who did not fit the outdoor image'. These workers were deliberately excluded from working directly with customers and were paid less. This two-tiered system of employee remuneration is not detailed in store policy, and workers appear not to be interviewed or hired on the basis of there being different 'levels' within the sales staff structure in the stores.
At the company's flagship store, where Barry Smith now spends most of his time, Cindy has observed that a young female in a wheelchair works front of store. Cindy is informed that 'this is for show'; 'we don't want to be accused of anything untoward'; and 'it can be observed that we do the right thing', but upon examination it is discovered that again the staff member in question is paid less and is restricted in the amount of customer contact she undertakes (she is often dispatched to the back to perform administrative tasks). A closer examination by Cindy of the pay structures throughout the organisation shows that no industrial award system of payment is adhered to; individual negotiations take place once an employee is hired; and that most of the staff are actually employed on a casual basis, with no signed employment contracts or condition agreements on file for staff.
When Cindy approaches Barry Smith about her concerns, he informs her that he has deliberately employed staff on a casual basis to allow flexibility, and has written the HR policies of the company so that they are 'vague' - 'That way we cannot be accused of anything out of order'. While Cindy tries to determine if there are any breaches of employment law taking place in the organisation, she stumbles across several outstanding issues that have been raised with Head Office but not addressed. Cindy finds a handwritten note relating to a complaint made several months earlier. A young Asian male working in one of the franchise stores has complained of inappropriate sexual references made to him by the female manager of the store. These comments have all been made while working in the back area of the store and usually after hours, when the young man was working late upon request of the manager; no extra remuneration is recorded for this extra work. Cindy also finds an email sent from an employee who left the company only a week before Cindy commenced work. This person had worked for the company for many years, but complains in the email that she was unfairly dismissed because she is now considered 'too old' for the organisation. Cindy cannot find any evidence of a response to either of these issues.
Cindy is starting to have serious doubts about the practices at BOA. She is very concerned as to the lack of follow-up for what she considers to be serious HR issues, and she is worried that the company's promotion of the 'all-Australian' male may lead to legal action following the successful prosecutions of Abercrombie & Fitch in the United States during 2004-08.
Task
A. Is Barry correct in his assumption that the company could not be accused of anything? Explain your answer.
B. Is there ever a case for 'positive' discrimination as an acceptable work practice?
C. What action should Cindy take to address the sexual harassment claims? How should Cindy handle the possible age discrimination claim?
D. What HR policies and practices need to be reviewed and/or put in place at BOA to make the company compliant with equal rights and discrimination laws?