Advertisement

Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 149–164 | Cite as

A Review of MCAD Public Hearings: Suggestions for Practice

  • Michael Carlozzi
Article
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Public hearing decisions from the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) offer public administrators, private employers, and researchers actionable information. This article analyzes the outcomes of these decisions over a 16-year period (2002–2018). Key findings are that private-sector employers were significantly more likely to lose at hearings than public-sector employers and that this gap appeared to result largely from differences in organizational size and gender-based claims. Smaller companies, in particular, lost at hearings significantly more than larger organizations in both sectors. Additional findings are that employers who participated in an interactive process were significantly more likely to prevail in reasonable accommodation disability cases and that appeals were rarely overturned by the MCAD’s Full Commission. Implications for administrators and human resource managers are discussed.

Keywords

Discrimination Employment Mcad Human resources Sexual harassment Pregnancy 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. About the MCAD (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/mcad/about/
  2. Annual Report (2016). Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/mcad/docs/annual-reports/2016-annual-report.pdf
  3. Black, S. E., & Brainerd, E. (2004). Importing equality? The impact of globalization on gender discrimination. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 57, 540–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Byron, R. A. (2010). Discrimination, complexity, and the public/private sector question. Work and Occupations, 37(4), 435–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byron, R. A., & Roscigno, V. J. (2014). Relational power, legitimation, and pregnancy discrimination. Gender and Society, 28(3), 435–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis-Stober, C. P., & Dana, J. (2014). Comparing the accuracy of experimental estimates to guessing: A new perspective on replication and the "crisis of confidence" in psychology. Behavior Research Methods, 46(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fact sheet: Small business in Massachusetts. (n.d.) Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations. Retrieved from https://macdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/Small_Business_in_Massachusetts.pdf
  8. Kaye, H. S., Jans, L. H., & Jones, E. C. (2011). Why don’t employers hire and retain workers with disabilities? Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 21(4), 526–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kochan, T. A., Lautsch, B. A., & Bendersky, C. (2000). An evaluation of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination Alternative Dispute Resolution Program. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 233.Google Scholar
  10. Leasher, M. K., & Miller, C. E. (2012). Discrimination across the sectors: A comparison of discrimination trends in private and public organizations. Public Personnel Management, 41(2), 281–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Long, J. E. (1975). Public-private sectoral differences in employment discrimination. Southern Economic Journal, 42(1), 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McInturff, K., & Tulloch, P. (2014). Narrowing the gap: The difference that public sector wages make. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Retrieved from https://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National%20Office/2014/10/Narrowing_the_Gap.pdf
  13. Mello, J. A. (1996). The strategic management of workplace diversity initiatives: Public sector implications. International Journal of Public Administration, 19, 425–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. O’Hare, C.K. (2008, July 17). State closes Small World Learning Center. Danvers Herald. Retrieved from http://danvers.wickedlocal.com/x1542094738/State-closes-Small-World-Learning-Center
  15. Oostendorp, R. H. (2009). Globalization and the gender wage gap. The World Bank Economic Review, 23(1), 141–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (2014). Human Resource Management. Mason: South-Western, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  17. Rainey, H. G., Backoff, R. W., & Levine, C. H. (1976). Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 36, 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Riccucci, N. M. (2007). The changing face of public employee unionism. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 27, 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Small Business Profile: Massachusetts. SBA: Office of Advocacy. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/MA_0.pdf
  20. Stainback, K., Ratliff, T. N., & Roscigno, V. J. (2011). The context of workplace sex discrimination: Sex composition, workplace culture and relative power. Social Forces, 89(4), 1165–1188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Statutes & Regulations. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/mcad/pubs-regs/statutes-regs/
  22. Step by Step Guide to Starting a Business. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/hed/business/start-business/new-business-steps.html
  23. Waters, B.J. (2016, June 7). Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission hit with substantial disability discrimination award. The National Law Review. Retrieved from https://www.natlawreview.com/article/massachusetts-rehabilitation-commission-hit-substantial-disability-discrimination

Cases Cited

  1. Abel v. Kiessling Transit, Inc. 30 MDLR 43 (2008).Google Scholar
  2. Abrams v. Paddington’s Place. 26 MDLR 149 (2004).Google Scholar
  3. Aldridge v. Thomas O’Connor Constructors, Inc. 27 MDLR 41 (2005).Google Scholar
  4. Anido v. Illumina Media. 35 MDLR 83 (2013).Google Scholar
  5. Charton v. Suso. 36 MDLR 1 (2013).Google Scholar
  6. Cortes v. Massachusetts Department of Children & Families. 37 MDLR 94 (2015).Google Scholar
  7. Croken v. Hagopian Hotels. 35 MDLR 155 (2013).Google Scholar
  8. Diiorio v. Willowbend Country Club, Inc. 33 MDLR 166 (2011).Google Scholar
  9. Flanagan v. City of Lawrence School Department. 32 MDLR 58 (2010).Google Scholar
  10. Griffin v. Eastern Contractors and S&R Construction Co. 30 MDLR 113 (2008).Google Scholar
  11. Haynes v. General Electric Company. 36 MDLR 79 (2014).Google Scholar
  12. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority v. MCAD et al. 450 Mass. 327 (2008).Google Scholar
  13. Mathis v. Phillips Chevrolet, Inc., 269 F.3d 771 (7th Cir. 2001).Google Scholar
  14. Mills v. A.E. Sales, Inc. 35 MDLR 163 (2013).Google Scholar
  15. Morse v. Massasoit Community College. 29 MDLR 134 (2007).Google Scholar
  16. Murphy v. S&H Construction Inc. 36 MDLR 160 (2014).Google Scholar
  17. Nagle v. Fairfield Financial Mortgage Group, Inc. 32 MDLR 179 (2010).Google Scholar
  18. Nixon v. Tony’s Barber Shop. 37 MDLR 192 (2015).Google Scholar
  19. Osorio v. Standhard Physical Therapy. (2018).Google Scholar
  20. Richner v. Highland Pizza. 32 MDLR 164 (2010).Google Scholar
  21. Roisten v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. 37 MDLR 197 (2015).Google Scholar
  22. Ross v. MBTA. 24 MDLR 18 (2002).Google Scholar
  23. Santos v. X-Treme Silkscreen & Design. 38 MDLR 192 (2016).Google Scholar
  24. Savage v. Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission. 38 MDLR 105 (2016).Google Scholar
  25. Sawyer v. Wimpy’s Restaurant. 31 MDLR 27 (2009).Google Scholar
  26. Schillace v. Enos Home Oxygen Therapy, Inc. 39 MDLR 59 (2017).Google Scholar
  27. Stonehill College v. MCAD et al. 441 Mass. 549 (2004).Google Scholar
  28. Strothers v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Corrections. 27 MDLR 155 (2005).Google Scholar
  29. Sun v. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. 36 MDLR 85 (2014).Google Scholar
  30. Williams v. Karl Storz Endovision, Inc. 26 MDLR 156 (2004).Google Scholar
  31. Hughes v. Cranberry Dental Associates. (2018).Google Scholar
  32. Moore v. Small World Learning. (2010).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations