Latest news with #HRDive
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Employer settles claims that it refused to promote Black employee, fired her after bias complaint
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. Dive Brief: A Maryland retirement community will pay $85,000 to settle U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that it refused to promote a Black manager and subsequently fired her when she complained of discrimination, EEOC said in a press release Tuesday. Per the 2024 complaint, the plaintiff sought promotion to a vice president or executive director position, but was told that she was ineligible because she lacked a bachelor's degree. She alleged Westminster Ingleside King Farm Presbyterian Retirement Communities nonetheless employed a White employee who lacked a bachelor's degree as its VP of HR and promoted another White employee with the same job title as the plaintiff to an executive director role. The plaintiff later received a bachelor's degree, but EEOC claimed her supervisor ignored the plaintiff's promotion request. It also alleged she received a 'false' written warning from HR, after which the plaintiff expressed a desire to file a race discrimination charge. She was terminated shortly afterward. EEOC alleged violations of federal laws including Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. As part of its consent decree with EEOC, the employer did not admit wrongdoing. Dive Insight: The EEOC noted that retaliation — such as that alleged in the Westminster Ingleside lawsuit — is unlawful irrespective of the validity of an employee's claims. Such complaints 'can be early warning signs for employers,' Debra Lawrence, regional attorney at EEOC, said in the press release. 'What employers should never do is treat complaints as the problem or take adverse action against the complainant.' According to agency enforcement guidance, employers may not retaliate against employees for opposing unlawful equal employment opportunity practices. This opposition may include actions such as complaining or threatening to complain about alleged discrimination against oneself or others. Retaliation has formed the basis of previous EEOC settlements with employers, including a 2024 agreement between the agency and an employer that it alleged retaliated against three employees — including an HR manager — for raising concerns about discriminatory workplace treatment. Employers should swiftly and thoroughly investigate employee complaints — with the assistance of an external investigator if necessary, an employment law attorney wrote in an op-ed to HR Dive in March.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
AI may diminish demand for high-wage skills like data analysis, research finds
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. Dive Brief: As artificial intelligence and automation redefine work, today's high-wage skills — including data analysis and process monitoring where AI has demonstrated strong capabilities — may diminish in demand and dip in salary, according to research by the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI and the Digital Economy Lab. In contrast, skills requiring human interaction and coordination — such as prioritizing and organizing work and training, teaching and effective communication — will grow in importance and command higher pay, the research, publicized July 7, found. Researchers also identified a mismatch between AI's capabilities and what workers want, which may hinder AI's successful integration into the workplace, according to the report. What workers want, the study found, is to work collaboratively with AI. Dive Insight: For the study, researchers surveyed 1,500 workers about what they wanted from AI and compared this to insight from 52 AI experts about what AI is capable of doing. The findings identified significant mismatches, revealing tasks that warranted reconsideration for automation, a media release explained. For example, in 41% of tasks, including writing creative content and preparing meeting agendas, AI implementation was either unwanted or technically not possible, the researchers said. Other tasks, such as monitoring budgets and creating production schedules, fell into an opportunity zone — highly desired but not yet technically possible, the study found. 'As AI systems become increasingly capable, decisions about how to deploy them in the workplace are often driven by what is technically feasible — workers are the ones most affected by these changes and the ones the economy ultimately relies on,' Yijia Shao, project leader and a Ph.D. student at Stanford Computer Science Department, stated in the release. Bringing employee perspectives to the table is critical to building systems they will embrace, Shao said. It also helps reveal overlooked opportunities for AI and guides 'more human-centered innovation, which in turn benefits technological development.' Organizations that ignore human-centric factors could end up implementing AI and generative AI tools without being completely clear on strategy or business goals, AI leaders at Deloitte Consulting cautioned in an April op-ed for HR Dive. Instead of rushing to beat out competitors, organizations should first understand generative AI's best use case for their business, the consultants advised. This gives HR leaders a better idea of what the company's talent and staffing needs may be, they said. Ultimately, the result of a company's AI investment will depend on human capabilities like cognizance, curiosity and collaboration, the consultants emphasized. Employers are recognizing this, according to a June report from talent assessment firm TestGorilla. Among more than 1,000 U.S. and U.K. hiring decisionmakers surveyed, 3 in 5 told TestGorilla that soft skills are more important today than five years ago. More than 70% said evaluating candidates on both hard and soft skills leads to better results, the survey found. Employers want people who can think critically, adapt and collaborate, TestGorilla's CEO noted. Recommended Reading How companies are planning for AI disruption Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Stanford researcher was harassed, fired due to antisemitism, lawsuit alleges
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. An Israeli researcher sued Stanford University July 10 for allegedly allowing colleagues, amid campus-wide antisemitism, to subject him to a hostile work environment and cause him to be fired because he is Jewish and Israeli. Per the complaint in Laps v. Leland Stanford Junior University, a few months after the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, the researcher was hired to work on an insulin project in a campus lab at the private, Palo Alto, California, university. The researcher claimed when he started working, a lab assistant who associated with Palestinian activists told him not to talk to her, tried to isolate him from co-workers, delayed his supplies and tampered with his research. He also alleged that in an effort to get him to leave, individuals, including the lab director, falsely told him a student had filed a sexual harassment charge against him. After the university confirmed the charge was a ruse and no claim had been made, the researcher filed a discrimination complaint detailing the antisemitic-based hostility he was experiencing. In response, the lab director fired him, locked him out of the lab and threatened immigration consequences if he didn't leave, the lawsuit alleged. He then filed a retaliation charge against the lab director. Stanford allegedly delayed investigating his complaints and narrowly reviewed his claims before concluding no wrongdoing occurred, according to the lawsuit. Through a WhatsApp group, the researcher learned other Israeli and Jewish students and researchers were experiencing similar hostility, including from a graduate student who warned the group about using a floor in a main campus building besieged with anti-Israel signs and protests, the lawsuit said. The researcher sued Stanford for religious and national origin discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He also sued the lab director for defamation and the university for breach of contract. In an email to HR Dive, a university representative stated, 'Stanford takes any allegation of antisemitism very seriously. In this instance and based on all the allegations that [the researcher] reported directly to the institution, a thorough investigation found that they were unsubstantiated.' Combating antisemitism, particularly on U.S. college campuses in the wake of the Hamas attack on Israel, has been a priority of the Trump Administration. In March, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the U.S. Departments of Justice, Health and Human Services and Education, and the General Services Administration announced steps they would be taking to protect individuals against antisemitism at U.S. universities. For example, as part of a federal task force, DOJ launched a Title VII investigation into the state-run University of California system to determine whether UC engaged in a pattern or practice of allowing an antisemitic hostile work environment to exist on its campuses. Additionally, EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas encouraged employees who experienced antisemitism on college campuses to submit a charge of discrimination. Also in March, HHS, ED and GSA initiated a comprehensive review of New York City-based Columbia University's federal contracts and grants in light of Columbia's 'ongoing inaction in the face of relentless harassment of Jewish students,' a press release said. Recommended Reading EEOC: Psychiatric center allegedly prioritized, promoted less qualified male therapist over female co-workers Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
12-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Widening AI training gap ushers in ‘birth of a new digital divide,' BambooHR says
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. While 77% of companies allow artificial intelligence tools at work, only 32% offer training, according to a July 1 report from BambooHR. A gap is growing across organizational hierarchies, with 72% of C-suite and vice president-level executives using AI daily, compared to only 18% of individual contributors, the report found. This 'birth of a new digital divide' could shift workplace power dynamics and widen gender gaps, BambooHR warned. 'Leaders need to develop clear and comprehensive AI policies that not only outline what's acceptable but also address the elephant in the room — the fear that using AI is somehow 'cheating,'' said Alan Whitaker, head of AI at BambooHR. 'When we communicate these policies clearly and transparently to all employees, we can help alleviate concerns, promote a culture of openness and empower our teams to harness the full potential of AI.' The survey of more than 1,500 full-time U.S. employees who work a desk job, including 500 HR professionals, found that half of managers and senior leaders receive AI training, compared to 23% of individual contributors. Compared to individual contributors, more than twice as many executives said they're creating efficiencies at work by using AI to write emails, develop presentations and complete other tasks. In addition, 80% of senior leaders viewed AI-assisted work as high quality, compared to 69% of managers and 28% of independent contributors. Although 72% of employees said they want to improve their AI skills, only about a third have received formal AI training from their employer, the report found. Even so, 61% of executives said they value employees who use AI more. Job seekers say there's a training gap, rather than a skills gap, when it comes to hiring — and that employers are passing over competent candidates because they aren't willing to train them, according to an Express Employment Professionals report. Most candidates said companies should increase investments in learning and development. Without additional training, 9 in 10 companies lack 'future-ready' talent strategies related to AI capabilities, according to a report from The Adecco Group. To better prepare, employers can implement structured plans to build skills, support employees and lead the workplace through AI-related disruption, the firm said. Recommended Reading How companies are planning for AI disruption Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
12-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The supervisor crisis — and why companies should be worried
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. Supervisors are quitting, yet nobody wants to step up to take their place, which is leading to burnout, poor workplace culture and empty leadership pipelines, according to a July 9 report from Express Employment Professionals. More than half of job seekers who are or were supervisors said they've quit or plan to quit a supervisory position. They pointed to a lack of fulfillment or advancement in their career, not feeling adequately compensated, mental health issues tied to being a supervisor, a desire for more time off, a desire for more flexible hours or a desire to leave a people management role. 'Supervisors are saying, 'No more.' Future leaders are saying, 'No, thanks,'' Bob Funk, Jr., CEO, president and chairman of Express Employment International, said in a news release. 'The result? A vicious cycle that decreases effectiveness, breeds toxicity and weakens the workplace. The companies that come to terms with the situation and start implementing solutions will be the ones that succeed in this reshaped economy.' In surveys of more than 1,000 U.S. adults and 1,000 U.S. hiring decision-makers, 86% of hiring managers said they believe supervisors have the tools they need. However, only a third said they offer training on critical skills such as conflict resolution or employee feedback. In addition, 72% said their companies should do more to better support supervisors. Beyond that, nearly 3 in 4 Generation Z workers said they would prefer to develop individual expertise rather than manage people. Without a pipeline of future supervisors, companies may experience a leadership vacuum in coming years, the report found. Notably, neglecting supervisor development can lead to several consequences, such as disengagement, lost revenue, weak culture, burnout and turnover. Instead, companies can reverse the trend by building leadership training programs, developing peer and mentor networks, investing in mental health initiatives and promoting work-life balance, the report found. As supervisors struggle, C-suite executives are also experiencing a 'crisis of confidence' as they face higher levels of stress, burnout and turnover, according to an LHH report. Senior leaders said they feel unprepared for today's business environment and need more support. Sign in to access your portfolio
