首页> 外文期刊>Advances in developing human resources >Merit Determinants of ADA Title I Allegations Involving Discharge: Implications for Human Resources Management and Development
【24h】

Merit Determinants of ADA Title I Allegations Involving Discharge: Implications for Human Resources Management and Development

机译:涉及放电的ADA标题I指控的优劣决定因素:对人力资源管理和开发的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Nonparametric tests of proportion were performed comparing discharge resolutions (the most prevalent discrimination issue filed with the EEOC between 1992 and 2008) with resolutions of a composite group of the next most prevalent discrimination issues (reasonable accommodation, terms and condition of employment, harassment and intimidation, and hiring). Results indicated that when an employee files an allegation of discharge discrimination, the resolution status of that allegation is more likely to be without Merit. Two exhaustive chi-square automatic interaction detector (CHAID) analyses were performed, with the first including 44 impairment types (e.g., back, traumatic brain injury, learning disability) and the second including those 44 impairment types combined into six categories (e.g., physical, neurological, sensory, and behavioral impairments). Results of the first exhaustive CHAID proved quite unwieldy but indicated that behavioral disabilities have relatively low merit resolution rates when it comes to discharge allegations (i.e., there is less actual discharge discrimination occurring for persons with behavioral disabilities). One additional finding was that filing discharge discrimination under one of the alternate prongs of the ADA's definition of disability (i.e., "regarded as a person with a disability," "record of a disability," or "association with a person with a disability") was the main driver of merit resolution activity. Results from a second exhaustive CHAID indicated that in the case of discharge merit resolution activity, employer industry drives the alternate prongs, employee race drives physical impairments, and employer industry drives behavioral impairments. Implications for human resources management and development research and practice are addressed.
机译:进行了非参数比例检验,比较了出院解决方案(1992年至2008年间由EEOC提出的最普遍的歧视问题)与下一个最普遍的歧视问题(合理的住宿条件,就业条件和条件,骚扰和恐吓)组成的组合和雇用)。结果表明,当一名雇员提出放电歧视指控时,该指控的解决状态很可能没有功绩。进行了两次详尽的卡方自动交互检测器(CHAID)分析,第一种包括44种障碍类型(例如,背部,脑外伤,学习障碍),第二种包括将这44种障碍类型组合为六类(例如,身体障碍) ,神经,感觉和行为障碍)。第一个详尽的CHAID的结果被证明非常笨拙,但表明在涉及出院指控时,行为障碍的择优率相对较低(即行为障碍者发生的实际出院歧视较少)。另一个发现是,根据ADA残疾定义的另一种规定提起出院歧视(即“被视为残障人士”,“残障记录”或“与残障人士的关系” )是择优活动的主要推动力。第二个详尽的CHAID的结果表明,就解雇绩优活动而言,雇主行业驱动替代产品,员工种族驱动身体损害,雇主行业驱动行为损害。解决了对人力资源管理和开发研究与实践的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号