[IPAC-List] Subgroup norms of inebriation?

[Ines.Fraenkel at sfgov.org]

Dear Shelley,
While consideration of gender and weight may be challenged (as may anything
'new' that prevents someone from being hired), I would assert that such
considerations are lawful, if there is enough empirical data that support
the findings.  As to ethnicity, that is a different question, as I suspect
that the differences associated with ethnicity are also influenced by
socio-economic status and conditions.

Ines Vargas Fraenkel
Chief Supervising Attorney - Office of Citizen Complaints
25 Van Ness Ave., Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94102
(415) 241-7738 direct
(415) 518-6052 cell
(415) 241-7733 fax
ines.fraenkel at sfgov.org
www.sfgov.org/occ




                                                                           
             "Shelley                                                      
             Spilberg"                                                     
             <Shelley.Spilberg                                          To 
             @post.ca.gov>             <ipac-list at ipacweb.org>             
             Sent by:                                                   cc 
             ipac-list-bounces                                             
             @ipacweb.org                                          Subject 
                                       [IPAC-List] Subgroup norms of       
                                       inebriation?                        
             10/14/2010 03:34                                              
             PM                                                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




Thanks to much of those who responded to my adverse impact record-keeping
question.  Here’s your bonus question:

When screening police candidates, an individual’s alcohol use, both current
and historical is taken into serious consideration. In particularly,
frequency of intoxication weighs heavy in these assessments.  In addition
to asking about their frequency of inebriation outright, the are also asked
about the amount and frequency of alcohol consumed, with the prospective
employers doing their own intoxication calculations based on legal
definitions of blood alcohol concentrations. However, it is
well-established the amount of alcohol needed to become inebriated is
moderated by one’s size (weight) and gender.

Is it lawful under the Civil Rights Act to factor in the candidate’s gender
and weight when calculating the candidate’s frequency and extent of
inebriation, particularly if this could lead to adverse employment actions
that vary by gender and perhaps ethnicity?

Shelley Weiss Spilberg, Ph.D.

CA. Commission on Peace Officer Stnds. & Trng.

1601 Alhambra Boulevard

Sacramento, CA.  95816-7083

(916) 227-4824

From: Mark Hammer [mailto:Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 6:54 AM
To: ipac-list at ipacweb.org; Shelley Spilberg
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Adverse Impact Statistics



We've always treated membership in each legally-protected group separately.
Of course, our legislation does not make the same distinctions as yours;
having only women, persons with disabilities, aboriginal persons, and
members of visible minorities, with no further within-group distinction.



If a person is a female member of a visible minority and also has a
disability, they count as female when we look at success rates for men vs
women, disabled when we compared disabled against non-disabled, and visible
minority when we compare vismin against non-vismin.  Insomuch as the
analysis is intended to identify whether there are specific systemic
issues, the multiple self-id does not present a computational problem.  If,
however, the intent of the analysis is to say whether, as an aggregate,
protected groups have the same success rates as non-protected, then one
needs to be able to differentiate between group-membership and actual
number of heads.  In which case, the person isn't so much 1/3 this, 1/3
that, and 1/3 the other, but one person who is a member of one or more
protected groups, and NOT a member of the particular reference group used
for comparison.



This sort of how-many-times-do-they-count challenge tends to come up a lot
when the same underqualified person can apply willy-nilly to multiple
positions.  Whether a member of a protected group or not, you have to be
able to differentiate between appliCANTS and appliCATIONS.



Ultimately, though, I would imagine it depends on the particular
statistical approach or index being used.  Just keep in mind that there are
always some proportion of false negatives.  That is, an individual might
legally qualify as being of two protected groups, but identify with one
more than the others, and only indicate that one.  We've also found that
sometimes the same folks will self-id on one form/test, but not on another.
Unless the individual has a VERY distinctive name that reliably pegs their
group membership, there is often no way to tell which of the incongruities
might have been the error.  Moreover, there are folks who think that
they've already told you once, and don't need to tell you again, because
your system just "knows".  So, you're gonna get error no matter what you
do.



A naive question: Is it possible for individuals to self-id as belonging to
3 or more protected groups, in an illogical manner?  In other words, could
I self-ID as African-American, Native-American *and* Hispanic-American, or
is that a logical/legal impossibility?  I ask simply because I wonder if
one needs to build in procedures to trim these observations as "noise" (not
that I would expect all that much noise to be contributed).



Mark Hammer

Ottawa


>>> "Shelley Spilberg" <Shelley.Spilberg at post.ca.gov> 2010/10/13 5:47 PM

>>>

If an applicant identifies as having multiple ethnicities (e.g, African
American and American Indian), how should it be reported in Adverse Impact
statistics?  Does each combination get its own category? Is it split
between the two categories (e.g., ½ AA and ½ AI)?  Is it recorded under one
ethnicity or the other?  If so, how is that decision made?


>>> "Shelley Spilberg" <Shelley.Spilberg at post.ca.gov> 2010/10/13 5:47 PM

>>>

If an applicant identifies as having multiple ethnicities (e.g, African
American and American Indian), how should it be reported in Adverse Impact
statistics?  Does each combination get its own category? Is it split
between the two categories (e.g., ½ AA and ½ AI)?  Is it recorded under one
ethnicity or the other?  If so, how is that decision made?

Shelley Weiss Spilberg, Ph.D.

CA. Commission on Peace Officer Stnds. & Trng.

1601 Alhambra Boulevard

Sacramento, CA.  95816-7083

(916) 227-4824


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This communication with its contents may contain
confidential and/or legally privileged information.  It is solely for the
use of the intended recipient(s).  Unauthorized interception, review, use
or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
communication.
_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list



>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may contain
information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or re-transmission
is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not authorized by the
named recipient(s), or if you have received this e-mail in error, then
please notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any copies.


>

Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre et
peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou soustraite à
la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute divulgation non
autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est interdit. Si vous
n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes pas autorisé par le
destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu par erreur, veuillez le
mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et supprimer le courriel et les
copies.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This communication with its contents may contain
confidential and/or legally privileged information.  It is solely for the
use of the intended recipient(s).  Unauthorized interception, review, use
or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
communication.
_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list