There are many factors an employer should consider while making decisions during the hiring process. They should abide by an established legal framework for the procedure as well as examine several ethical issues. While looking for new employees, it is essential to opt for diversity and provide equal opportunities for all candidates while maintaining high hiring standards and choosing individuals who can work for the benefit of a company.
One of the primary responsibilities of an employer is to avoid any bias during the hiring process. The US employment law forbids any form of discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, disability, and age (Dwoskin et al., 2013). However, this is also an ethical issue: hiring managers have moral obligation to create equal opportunities for all candidates regardless of background. Moreover, if hiring an individual who is otherwise suitable for the position requires reasonable accommodations due to their disability or religious beliefs, they are expected to be made (Dwoskin et al., 2013). Non-biased hiring policy allows companies to expand the range of candidates considered for a position and, eventually, choose the most skilled ones. Moreover, research shows that there are many benefits to workplace diversity, including better decision-making and efficient innovation (Lambert, 2016). Diversification of candidates pool can be achieved through making information regarding a vacancy available through different channels. However, in order to attract suitable candidates, it is important to outline the main expectations (Dwoskin et al., 2013). It is also crucial to educate hiring managers on ethical decision-making principles and conducting interviews in a non-biased fashion.
Another controversial issue concerns pre-employment screenings. During the hiring process, companies may subject candidates to various kinds of tests. However, research points out that the ones aimed at measuring personality traits or cognitive abilities can be discriminating, especially for people with disabilities, and give only a limited view of a person’s qualifications, while substance abuse tests can be false-positive entailing several legal and ethical consequences (Brody et al., 2015). While designing any assessments, it is crucial to remember that fairness should be the foundation for hiring managers ethics (Villegas et al., 2019, p. 85). Therefore, pre-employment skills tests must be similar for all candidates and correlate only with the job functions.
Some concerns are also expressed regarding using artificial intelligence for candidates screenings. Experts claim that AI is not protected from learned biases: some precedents prove that such programs do not rate candidates in a gender-neutral way (Dattner et al., 2016). However, giving AI more diverse examples to learn from can help create technology that does not share human prejudices (Sharma, 2019). Some other controversial issues concern social media screenings and requesting information regarding applicants criminal and credit history. Looking through potential employees social networks seems to be an intuitive and almost irresistible decision for many managers. However, since social media can reveal personal information that has not been discussed during the interview (such as sexual orientation), this can cross personal borders and be highly unethical. Research also shows that employees may not trust an employer who, they have reasons to suspect, engages in such a behavior (Stoughton et al., 2015). While these days, it is hard to avoid eventually encountering an individual’s social media, no decisions must be made based on the information learned from such sources (unless the applicant engages in illegal behavior).
Checking a person’s background can also lead to unethical implications. Many US states forbid requesting information regarding a candidate’s criminal history and credit records (Dwoskin et al., 2013). One study points out that poor credit history can be due to some situations beyond one’s control, so it is essential to give an applicant an opportunity to discuss their experience (Shethji, 2016). However, while it is important not to discriminate against people with convictions or poor credit histories, it is natural that a company may try to avoid hiring a person who, for instance, is prompt to violence because it can be dangerous for clients and other employees. Moreover, some candidates may be dishonest in the information they provide, which can negatively affect productivity and the reputation of a company. As one study points out, a hiring manager should be “an ethical gatekeeper” of an organization (Villegas et al., 2019, p. 81). Therefore, a background check might be needed, though it should be appropriately conducted so as to avoid causing harm.
Determining candidates’ moral values is essential because a company s success largely depends on the ethical values all employees share. However, it is also necessary not to create an authoritarian ideology that restricts workers moral intuition (Adelstein & Clegg, 2016). As Hill and Rapp claim, it is important to allow “employees at all levels in the company hierarchy to explore and refine ethical beliefs without constraints associated with status or reporting structure” (2014, p. 628). Therefore, employers have to balance, allowing moral self-determination of staff members while still maintaining high ethical expectations.
Thus, hiring managers are responsible for providing equal opportunities to all eligible candidates, maintaining current employees’ safety, and enhancing a company’s performance. Therefore, while creating hiring strategies and making decisions, they need to be aware of the legal and ethical implications of their actions. It is essential to avoid any form of discrimination regarding candidates whose abilities and educational background are suitable. Managers should acknowledge that crossing personal borders (by asking certain questions during interviews or scrutinizing one’s social media) is unethical and undermines trust between a candidate and an organization.
References
Adelstein, J., & Clegg, S. (2016). Code of ethics: A stratified vehicle for compliance. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(1), 53-66.
Brody, R., Perri, F. & Buren, H. (2015). Further beyond the basic background check: Predicting future unethical behavior. Business and Society Review, 120(4), pp. 549–576.
Dattner, B., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Buchband, R., & Schettler, L. (2019). The legal and ethical implications of using AI in hiring. Harvard Business Review, Web.
Dwoskin, L. B., Squire, M. B. & Patullo, J. E. (2013). Welcome aboard! How to hire the right way. Employee Relations Law Journal, 38(4) pp. 28–63.
Hill, R. P., & Rapp, J. M. (2014). Codes of ethical conduct: A bottom-up approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(4), pp. 621–630.
Lambert, J. (2016). Cultural diversity as a mechanism for innovation: Workplace diversity and the absorptive capacity framework. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 20(1), pp. 68–77.
Sharma, K. (2019). How to keep human bias out of AI [Video]. TED. Web.
Shethji, Pooja. (2016). Credit checks under Title VII: Learning from the criminal background check context. New York University Law Review, 91(4), pp. 989–1026.
Stoughton, J.W., Thompson, L.F. & Meade, A.W. (2015). Examining applicant reactions to the use of social networking websites in pre-employment screening. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(1), pp. 73–88.
Villegas, S., Lloyd, R. A., Tritt, A., & Vengrouskie, E. F. (2019). Human resources as ethical gatekeepers: Hiring ethics and employee selection. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 16(2), pp. 80–88.