Introduction
Employee interviews are popular as part of the selection process because of its more personal nature and its ability to measure characteristics not accessible with other methods (US OPM 3). However, in a contemporary environment governed by anti-discrimination laws, drawing out an applicant’s behavior can be tricky and prone to misinterpretation for discriminatory hiring practices as in the case of Specialist Kayla Reyes.
An Overview of Facts
Army veteran Specialist Kayla Reyes, age 21 and had four years of overseas combat deployment, interviewed for a job in sales at Macy’s (Fashion Fair Mall in Fresno, CA) in February 2014 and was told by the hiring manager that she was not suited for a sales position due to her combat experience in Afghanistan (Nye n. p.). The manager told her, “Being that you’ve been over (in Afghanistan), you wouldn’t really know how to approach people Once a customer’s in your face, you wouldn’t know how to do it. You wouldn’t know how to react.” Stunned, Reyes tried to object, but had an impression the manager was not listening. Then, the manager mentioned an opening in loss prevention, which fit Reyes’ combat experience. Reyes took to Facebook to ventilate her frustration. Macy’s did offer her a job, but not the sales position she applied. Reyes turned down the offer.
The ‘War’ Mindset as a Basis for Denying Employment
Mindset, a unique personal paradigm for viewing reality (Amin and Claudia 231), is a psychological construct that plays an important role in the success of people in specific work environments (228), such as a global mindset for a highly diverse and complex global business world. It determines an employee’s capability to be competitive, adaptable, and open to learning in a highly uncertain environment (231). From a behavioral perspective, there is actually no serious problem with a ‘war’ mindset. However, in the context of sales and customer service, survivalist combat will not fit, or detrimental, in environments where patience and persuasion is of paramount importance. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that an interview is an exploratory activity where the hiring manager assesses the actual behavioral responses of the applicant (US OPM 3). In fact, the manager’s remarks apparently tested Reyes’s capability to deal with offhand statements that can happen on the sales floor, coming from customers, and which may be perceived by Reyes as offending or insulting. The manager evidently wanted to find out: How is she going to deal with it? As can be seen in Reyes’s reaction and later behaviors (e.g. attempt to object, going to Facebook to ventilate, etc.), the manager was right that, once the customer’s in her face, Reyes “wouldn’t know how to do it. (She) wouldn’t know how to react.” In effect, it is evident that the hiring manager intended not to base her assessment on Reyes’s experience in war, but how she will react on perceived personal threats on the sales floor where combativeness is not an option. And the Courts will look at the facts and circumstances to determine intent (Summers 66).
Denying Employment and the U.S. Code
The 38 U.S. Code 4331 (a) stated that an American who has served in a uniformed service “shall not be denied initial employment by an employer on the basis of that performance of service.” Evidently, the Macy’s manager did not break the law because she did not deny Reyes an opportunity for employment with the establishment. In fact, she offered Reyes a post that she felt Reyes fitted perfectly. The only difference was that she did not offer the job that Reyes wanted to get. As a delegated officer of the employer, the hiring manager shares the legal assumption, which gives employers the sole right to determine the employee placement posts deemed suitable to their overall competency (Summers 65). In fact, it is evident that Macy’s had the intent of hiring Reyes for the loss prevention function.
Fair and Balanced Employment Interviewing: Structured or Non-Structured
The US OPM (3) evidently preferred a structured (over unstructured) interview on the basis of low reliability and moderate validity and thus of fairness and balance. However, this positivist bias in understanding reliability and validity is as outdated as the earlier norms between quantitative and qualitative research designs (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 180-181). Evidently, structured interviews are limited in uncovering actual behaviors and motivations in the past and future situations as these can vary widely between applicants, making the objective numerical rating difficult, if not impossible, to do. Even the US OPM (3) admitted that the general practice of not scoring applicant responses at all. Instead, level-based grading was suggested (8-9) and unstructured probing questions permitted (12). It is rational to avoid making comments during an interview that might be interpreted as discriminatory for which labor laws intended to protect employees from (Summers 66).
Four Recommendations for Policy Improvement and Future Action
Conclusion: Macy’s Non-Discrimination Policy Statement
Macy’s is an equal opportunity employer. It does not discriminate employees and applicants on the basis of age, ethnicity or race, gender (or its expression), disability, marital status, military status, religion (or creed), or skin color in any of its activities or operations, including, but not limiting to, recruitment (including employment advertisements), compensation, development, promotion, and termination. It is committed to an inclusive working environment and takes affirmative actions that ensure discrimination does not occur.
Works Cited
Amin, Grace and Genoveva Claudia. “The Effect of Motivation, Competency and Organizational Learning towards Global Mindset (Study of PUC Employees on Competitive in AFTA 2015)”. Universal Journal of Management 2016, 4(5): 228-233. PDF file.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Chapter 10: Validity and reliability. (7th ed., pp. 179-216). In: Research methods in education. London, UK: Routledge.
Nye, James. “Unemployed Female Veteran Hits Out at Macy’s After Sales Boss Said Her ‘Mindset’ Wasn’t Right for a Store Job Because She’d Been to War”. Mail Online 30 Mar. 2014. Web. < http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2592706/Female-army-veteran-21-hits-Macys-denied-job-mindset-wasnt-right-sales-floor.html#ixzz2xl5Hg8ku>
Summers, Clyde W. “Employment At Will in the United States: The Divine Right of Employers”. U. Pa. Journal of Labor and Employment Law 2000, 3(1): 65-86. PDF file.
US OPM. (2008). Structured interviews: A practical guide. Washington, DC: United States Office of Personnel Management.
