BEST PRACTICES
BEST PRACTICES/EMPLOYMENT LAW
Do you have a
best practice you’d
like to share
with our readers?
Contact Lisa Crawford
at 772.466.3346
or lisa@indianrivermag.com
www.tcbusiness.com
308 Ave. A, Fort Pierce, FL 34950
www.indianrivermagazine.com
Produced by Indian River Magazine Inc. and the Small
Business Development Center at Indian River State College
TCBusiness.com 47
AVOID GENDER
PREFERENCE IN
JOB POSTINGS
David Miklas is an
employment lawyer based
in Fort Pierce. His firm, Law
Office of David Miklas,
exclusively represents
employers, both in the
private and public sectors.
DAVID MIKLAS
A South Florida company
had a sales team consisting of
22 men and five women. The
owner of the company was
inspired by the #MeToo movement
and wanted to make
sure he was doing his part to
“level the playing field.” He decided
to run an ad specifically
intended to hire more women
into the sales department.
The company ran a job listing
on the website, stating it was
“taking the radical approach
of actively soliciting women
salespeople.” The title above
the listing announced that
the company “Wants to Hire
Women Sales Associates!”
Although the ad specifically
targeted women applicants,
a male applicant applied but
was rejected via an email that
read, “At this time we won’t
be moving forward with your
application.”
The male applicant filed a
charge of discrimination with
the Florida Commission on
Human Relations. The FCHR
investigated the allegations
and in June 2018 ruled partially
in favor of the applicant,
determining that the company
fully considered his application
regardless of his gender before
it rejected him. However, the
FCHR also concluded the company’s
stated gender preference
was “direct evidence of
gender discrimination” under
Florida law. The FCHR stated
in its ruling that “reasonable
cause exists to believe that an
unlawful practice occurred” in
the company’s explicitly soliciting
female applicants.
In fact, the FCHR’s executive
director wrote in her
determination of reasonable
cause that the company
“provided the posting and
acknowledged that ... it stated
a gender preference because
the company wanted to get
more female employees …This
is direct evidence of gender
discrimination under section
760.10(6), Florida Statutes.”
The company’s main
defense was that the male applicant
was unqualified for the
position because he had no
prior sales experience and did
not even live in Florida.
The applicant was seeking
back pay and front pay from
the date the position was filled
by another individual, along
with attorney fees.
This recent South Florida
case reminds all Florida
employers that there is a significant
danger in running advertisements,
including online
postings, excluding a certain
segment of the population. v
/www.tcbusiness.com
/www.tcbusiness.com
/www.indianrivermagazine.com
/TCBusiness.com
link