Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!dmcanzi
From: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.women
Subject: Re: Alternative Action
Message-ID: <1456@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Jun-85 16:25:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1456
Posted: Thu Jun  6 16:25:08 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Jun-85 02:24:05 EDT
References: <1447@watdcsu.UUCP> <657@fisher.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 30
Xref: watmath net.politics:9284 net.women:5555
Summary: 

In article <657@fisher.UUCP> david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) writes:
>> There is no reason why the person who interviews job applicants has to
>> be the same person who makes the decision who to hire.  Let the
>> interviewer write up a 'spec sheet' for each applicant in which any
>> information as to the applicants race, gender or nationality is
>> suppressed.  A decision must be made beforehand as to what information
>> is to be included.  ...
>
>Seems to me this only changes who discriminates; now it'll be the
>interviewer, rather than the hirer.

I thought of that.  Since it is decided beforehand what kinds of
information can be included on the 'spec sheets', the only way for the
interviewer to practice discrimination is by lying and/or omitting
relevant information.  In part of my article that you didn't quote, I
mentioned a second interviewer, spot-checking the first interviewer's
work by reinterviewing a random sample of interviewees.

This scheme fails only if both of the interviewers are dishonest.  The
second interviewer can be (a) borrowed from another branch of the
company, or (b) rented or borrowed from another company, or (c) from
the government.  This reduces the likelihood of the interviewers
getting chummy and covering for each other.
-- 

David Canzi

"When more and more people are thrown out of work, unemployment
results."
	-- Calvin Coolidge