Same job. different race, different pay.

[14thelittleguy]

In Virginia...​

Six months ago, my girlfriend was offered a job at a pharmaceutical company which is staffed by a Temp-agency (which also pays the wages of the temporary employees). At that time, she had six months of experience in her field (analytical chemistry). When discussing wages, she mentioned that she had been making $19/hour at her previous job, but the recruiter was adamant that the company refused to pay more than $18/hour. Eventually my girlfriend accepted the job.
Working at the pharmaceutical company, my girlfriend met another African American lady (also employed through the temp agency by the same recruiter) with five years of experience in the chemistry field, who was also making $18/hour. In the six months my girlfriend has worked there, the company has hired several non-minorities with no prior experience in the chemistry field at a rate of $20/hour, to do the same job as the two African Americans. When the other African American lady asked the recruiter about the disparity in pay, the reply was to the effect of "The company was owned by a different corporation at that time, and pricing was different." When my girlfriend asked the recruiter the same thing (because at the time of her hire the transition between companies had already been made) she was told that her managers at the pharmaceutical company dictated her pay, and that people's pay might be a little different based on experience in the field. She has brought the matter to her supervisors' attention, but they insist they don't know what's going on and that any disparity in pay surely isn't racially motivated, and that furthermore these matters are confidential and shouldn't be discussed among employees. Basically, the managers seem to be trying to make it look like she's just complaining and there's nothing that can be done, while the recruiter seems to have contradicted herself. Does she have an EEOC case? I understand that there are other factors that dictate pay-rates, but I was always led to believe that holding everything else constant (education, interviewing skills, etc.--things which seem to be held constant here) the most important factor was the amount of experience, which doesn't seem to be a determinant in this case, as those with the most experience are making the least.

 

[lukeroberts]

When you say the company hired the non-minorities...are you referring to the temp agency or the pharm company? If it is the latter, then that is your answer. Temp agencies take quite a big cut of the total money outlay.
If it is the former, there are quite a bit of things at play.
I work in this industry and I know for a fact temps are contract based...usually 6mo or a year. I contract with the temp agency for candidates, they give me some with corresponding hourly rates, and I make a decision based on my needs at the hour amount quoted. After employment, no wage increases happen within the contract period.
Granted, there might be sometime nefarious here, but there also might not.

 

[14thelittleguy]

I'm sorry, I knew what I was trying to say was complicated and despite my best efforts it still came out hard to understand (even by me).

The newer employees were also hired by the same recruiter at the temp agency. And yes, my girlfriend is a contracted employee (one year). But the issue is not about trying to procure an increase like an annual raise after the contract expires, the issue is that upon the offer of employment, the minorities were told that the pay rate was non-negotiable, while less experienced non-minorities have since been hired (also as temps), at higher wages, while the recruiter herself has claimed that "wages may vary within a small range due to experience," and the most experienced employees have the lowest wages. The recruiter's explanations and executions are not matching up. Does she have a case, or are there too many variables in hiring to be able to say that one factor had an overt influence in spite of others?

 

[Zigner]

I'm sorry, I knew what I was trying to say was complicated and despite my best efforts it still came out hard to understand (even by me).

The newer employees were also hired by the same recruiter at the temp agency. And yes, my girlfriend is a contracted employee (one year). But the issue is not about trying to procure an increase like an annual raise after the contract expires, the issue is that upon the offer of employment, the minorities were told that the pay rate was non-negotiable, while less experienced non-minorities have since been hired (also as temps), at higher wages, while the recruiter herself has claimed that "wages may vary within a small range due to experience," and the most experienced employees have the lowest wages. The recruiter's explanations and executions are not matching up. Does she have a case, or are there too many variables in hiring to be able to say that one factor had an overt influence in spite of others?

The more you explain, the less it seems like illegal discrimination. When your friend was hired, a certain policy was in place. Upon the company changing hands, that policy changed...for everyone. If your friend were hired today, she would be hired at the new rate offered to new hires.

 

[ESteele]

If your girlfriend is truly exercised about this pay disparity, then she should contact the EEOC and/or local employment counsel to weigh whether she should file an employment discrimination claim. The company may have a solid non-discriminatory reason for why it hired the black and the non-black employees at different rates of pay. It is also possible the “change of policy” explanation is a pretext. Again, if she feels strongly about this issue, then she should explore it.

Separately, employees have the right under federal law to discuss their respective wages (and/or other working condition issues) with each other. If the company took any adverse action against your girlfriend (or anyone else) for having such discussions, then she would have the potential basis for pursuing a claim under the National Labor Relations Act.

 

[LdiJ]

I'm sorry, I knew what I was trying to say was complicated and despite my best efforts it still came out hard to understand (even by me).

The newer employees were also hired by the same recruiter at the temp agency. And yes, my girlfriend is a contracted employee (one year). But the issue is not about trying to procure an increase like an annual raise after the contract expires, the issue is that upon the offer of employment, the minorities were told that the pay rate was non-negotiable, while less experienced non-minorities have since been hired (also as temps), at higher wages, while the recruiter herself has claimed that "wages may vary within a small range due to experience," and the most experienced employees have the lowest wages. The recruiter's explanations and executions are not matching up. Does she have a case, or are there too many variables in hiring to be able to say that one factor had an overt influence in spite of others?

What you are describing is not uncommon with temp agencies and it has nothing to do with race. It has to do with supply and demand, and the temp agency's share of the price paid by the employer.

Example: (this is only an example, these figures are made up) The temp agency has 6 people on board that are qualified to do a particular skilled job. The temp agency charges the employer 25.00 an hour for someone to do the job, and the temp agency needs a minimum profit of 5.00 an hour and prefers to make a profit of 7.00 an hour. The employer asks for two people. The temp agency will send out the two people that they can get to accept the job for 18.00 an hour.

Then, the employer asks for 4 more people. None of those 4 people will accept the job at 18.00 an hour. They insist on 20.00 an hour. First the temp agency will try to get the employer to pay more for those people (ie 27.00 an hour) but if all else fails, the temp agency will pay the employees 20.00 an hour and accept just 25.00 an hour from the employer.

So yes, when there are multiple temps on a job you can just about guarantee that they will not all be paid the same amount of money, and it has little to do with how much experience they have...and nothing to do with race or any other factors that would indicate discrimination. It all has to do with supply and demand.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

If she is unhappy with the temp agencies wage rate, she has the option to demand a raise or quit.

 

[Hot Topic]

The fact that you're complaining on your girlfriend's behalf suggests that you're more concerned about the situation than she is.