Ask the Experts is an exclusive online forum provided by Circa. Federal contractors and subcontractors are invited to submit questions to industry experts related to OFCCP compliance, affirmative action planning, and equal employment opportunity.
LinkedIn and Indeed are job boards that have a function called “Easy Apply”. It allows applicants to express interest in a posted role by just sending a resume but not having to complete the full application. I know that if we were to want to formally interview the candidate after seeing the resume, that we’d need to have the candidate formally apply first. However, is there an issue for a federal contractor to have this expression of interest as a separate step if we retained the information through one of the two job boards in case of audit?
Hi Colin, A formal application process is not required by the rules that OFCCP enforces, but only that the expression of interest be considered. Once a company is reviewing resumes, if the other two Internet applicant requirements are met, then the individual is an applicant according to OFCCP and the pool may extend to those that use "Easy Apply." Some companies will automatically require the "Easy Apply" candidates to fill in a company application before being considered and then only...
We are trying to streamline our recruiting process. Many of our positions require a contingent offer letter to be sent. The positions are contingent on clearance and acceptance by the government. At times, we may enter the candidate’s start date as TBD on the offer letter, which is established after all contingencies are met. Once met, we enter the actual hire date in our ATS, which also matches their start date in our HR system. Are we required to send a Final Offer Letter with the updated start date to the candidate for compliance?
No. Any record made or created must be kept, but there is no obligation to create a final offer letter. From what you wrote in the question, it sounds like you are tracking appropriately.
At times we may open a position with the intent to fill it with W2, that is always our preference. If the position is hard to fill, we may accept a Corp-to-Corp agreement. What is the proper process to track this? Should this be marked as closed unfilled since we did not fill it with our own employee? Is there anything wrong with tracking C2Cs in our ATS? We would like to be able to track all of our open positions along with our recruiting department’s productivity for each role. Just looking for best practice solutions to this situation.
Assuming that a C2C is a 1099, then it's best to track that as the fill for the position. Ensure to note the type of fill (i.e. "C2C"). Item 19 on the itemized listing requires compensation data for "contract" employees, but does not define this term. In my experience, it is best to have the record than not have it, so I typically recommend to track such an individual, so no, not wrong to track in ATS. "19. Employee level...
I have a large job group with dissimilar roles and pay rates. Because of this, I am thinking of breaking the larger group into three subgroups. I have read differing opinions on how large the job groups should be to maintain meaningful statistical analysis. Anywhere from 10-15 up to 30. Can someone advise on what the lowest and highest threshold should be for a job group?
According to 41 CFR 60-2.12, "jobs at the establishment with similar content, wage rates, and opportunities, must be combined to form job groups. Similarity of content refers to the duties and responsibilities of the job titles which make up the job group. Similarity of opportunities refers to training, transfers, promotions, pay, mobility, and other career enhancement opportunities offered by the jobs within the job group." If there are jobs combined within a job group that should not be, you will...
For federal contractors, I know that at a minimum we must include references to the protected classes: race, gender, religion, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status and disability. Are we required to include EEOC protections or state protections too or is this just a best practice? I have no desire to create multiple policies for essentially the same subject. Most often, I have seen just the minimum federal contractor protected statuses, so I am wondering if what we have stated is overkill. Where can I find what is required from a state, local and federal level for EEO statements?
It is not required to have phone number listed in the AAP for the individual that administers the plan. There are pros and cons regarding whether to include or exclude a contact number. For example, some companies want to direct any questions about the AAP, including questions from the OFCCP, to a particular person who can best answer questions. Others may not want to provide any more information than is required.
We have a department asking if they have to list a temporary job with the state workforce agency if the total hours for the job are less than 24 hours? The position may be used over a period of several months but the total hours of work would be less than 24 hours. Do the OFCCP’s regulations define what “3-days” means? Thanks.
Assuming the position is classified as an employee (W-2 EE) and not an independent contractor (1099), the job is still subject to the mandatory listing requirement. The VEVRAA regulation states that, “As used in this clause: i. All employment openings includes all positions except executive and senior management, those positions that will be filled from within the contractor's organization, and positions lasting three days or less. This term includes full-time employment, temporary employment of more than three days' duration, and...
If I have a posted position available that I know an ex-employee would be qualified for, can I reach out to the employee to discuss the opportunity? Would that be viewed as skewing the candidate pool?
Hi Amy, One person definitely does not skew the pool. Of course a company wants to keeps its processes as consistent as possible. However, rehires are often properly addressed as a separate pool since there is a higher rehire rate than unknown applicants. If the company often reaches out to former employees, then keep an eye on patterns impacting a particular group and of course any adverse impact.
If we as a staffing agency recruit for direct placement position with a client, we may include the client name in some of the postings. Our agency would perform the recruiting functions however, our client would ultimately make the decision on who will be selected for the job and the client obviously would be the employer once the candidate is hired.
Given this information, would we include our EEO tagline as well as the client’s EEO tagline? My thought process is that since we are recruiting, we would want to include our tagline. Should we also include the client’s tagline since they have the final say with regard to who will be hired as well as the fact that they will be the candidate’s employer?
My other thought on this is that what if there are two taglines and our tagline does not line up with the client’s tagline (i.e. we may have additional protected groups outside of the OFCCP requirement whereas the client only has protected groups listed that meet the minimum OFCCP requirements).
Should or should we not include both EEO taglines in the job posting?
The tagline must include the protected groups covered by OFCCP enforcement, but can include more. So if your staffing firm's tagline includes all the same protected groups in the client tag line, plus more protected groups, then the staffing firm's tagline will meet the OFCCP requirement. If the client name is mentioned in the advertisement, it is important that it be clear that both companies meet the obligation. (You need not post two tag lines, but make sure that the...
Would an employer be in violation of OFCCP/EEOC regulations if the employer changes the job title or job content after the job has been posted to the public, in an effort to make the job seem more flexible or more relatable to a larger candidate population?
There's no specific regulation that would prohibit what you want to do -- the compliance issue is one of record keeping and subsequent analysis. However, I do have a word of caution having to do with an employer's motivation for doing this -- including how frequently it's done. You should be concerned if the change to "make the job seem more flexible or more relatable" to a larger population of potential applicants is REALLY to justify selecting one of the...
I have a question regarding Affirmative Action reporting. If a candidate applied last year (in 2019) and we hire them this year (2020) for a role that was posted last year, does reporting reflect that candidate for this year or last year?
For purposes of all analyses that are done in conjunction with updating an AAP, and/or submitting data to the OFCCP in the course of a compliance review or complaint investigation, it is very important to associate ALL applicants with each selection decision for which they were considered.* In your example, the hiring decision was made in 2020 so all applicants -- no matter when they applied -- for that opportunity must be included in the analysis of that opportunity. It...
This forum provides information of a general nature. None of the answers or information provided is intended as legal advice or opinion relative to specific matters, facts, situations, or issues. Additional facts and information or future developments may affect the subjects addressed. You should consult with an attorney about your specific circumstance before acting on any of this information since it may not be applicable to your situation. Circa and all experts expressly disclaim all liability with respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the contents of this forum.
