Thanks Karl. I was coming up blank.
Bob Lamb     ...deep in the heart of TEXAS

-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Karl Boedecker
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 12:12 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Bob Lamb's Query


At 03:09 PM 11/17/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Good Question. Shooting from the hip, I don't think failure to
>advertise, standing alone, would make a case for discrimination. It
>might be some evidence of discrimination and, if you don't have an
>appropriate racial mix and hired almost exclusively relatives of
>employees, you would have a problem. Gender, religious, etc.
>discrimination would be less sensitive to this sort of thing. We
>might even have cases involving employers who have a lot of drop-in
>and unsolicited applications, and would have no need to advertise. I
>really think, in most cases, it would be just another factor to
>consider in a particular case. Overall, I don't think it is
>discriminatory unless you are operating under a mandatory
>affirmative action order. It would be a bigger factor there. Bottom
>line is that if you have some reason to show that you don't
>advertise because you don't need to, it shouldn't be a problem.
>
>DISCLAIMER: Remember, this is a quick hip shot
>
>        Tom
>
>
>>>> [log in to unmask] 11/17/00 11:44AM >>>
>HELP!! After a frustrating attempt to research this issue I have
>resorted to
>your collective wisdom.
>  ISSUE:  Is failure to advertise for a job vacancy considered
>invidious
>discrimination?
>
>Bob Lamb     ...deep in the heart of TEXAS
>

Bob,

I suggest that you look at EEOC v Consolidated Service Systems 989 F.2d 233
(7th Cir. 1993). Judge Posner analyzes this issue from a Law and Economics
perspective.

Karl Boedecker
University of San Francisco