DOJ Teaches Hiring Lessons

I doubt the Department of Justice set out to teach any employment lessons at all when it began placing too much weight on political factors in making hiring decisions.  Another report just released by the department’s Office of Professional Responsibility and its Inspector General’s Office provides several lessons nonetheless.  (Click here, here and here for more on the underlying probe.)

As noted in a previous post, this kind of situation always causes annoying hypocrisy.  It’s also worth noting that hiring at the DOJ is a bit complicated, because some jobs are purely political and some are nonpolitical career positions.  The latter are subject to federal Civil Service laws, which create a line protecting applicants for such positions from politics.  Based on the new report, the line was frequently crossed.  Now, on to lessons for all employers.

The DOJ person who wielded the power in improperly eliminating applicants for political reasons was 34 years old.  With all due respect to the younger generation, you can’t give that kind of power to someone that young.  She may have been as smart as a whip, but her practical experience and wisdom were lacking.  And regardless of how old or experienced the person in charge of hiring is, there must be checks and balances in place to make sure hiring is done appropriately.

The DOJ power broker showed her inexperience by blurting out to applicants comments (sometimes writing them down) about abortion, liberal Democrats, God, guns, gays, same-sex marriage, pro-marriage, anti-civil union–comments sure to raise a red Civil Service flag.  Before dismissing concern about these comments coming up in job interviews at your company because you’re not covered by Civil Service laws, think twice.  Discussions about abortion, God, gays, same-sex marriage, pro-marriage, and anti-civil union issues relate not only to politics but religion as well.  Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, religion is off-base when making hiring decisions.

The Internet was regularly used at the DOJ to screen applicants.  It’s not unlawful to use the Internet this way, but be careful.  In the case of the DOJ, political information was sought.  If you’re using the Internet in the hiring process, what information are you seeking?  What do you get?  If you learn an applicant is a member of the NAACP or NOW, you have information that could be used against you in a discrimination case.  If you learn an applicant filed a workers’ compensation case or her spouse has a disability, you’ve created evidence of possible disability discrimination.

Perhaps more than anything, the DOJ fiasco teaches us what we already know–or say we do.  The hiring process is for the purpose of choosing the best candidate–based on facts, not rumors; credentials, not politics; experience, not who you know; questions about the job, not something unrelated.  It’s easy to throw stones at politicians in this kind of situation.  But every workplace has its own politics, which if left unchecked, will cause any employer to make stupid, improper decisions.