Texas Roadhouse caught discriminating, mad at agency

Ridiculous!! No-one complained. If they had hired the old person would they have been discriminating against the younger person? If I have two job applicants, one wearing huge gauges and one without, and I choose the one without, am I discriminating against the one with guages. Has the Government nothing better to do than witch hunt? Absolutely bloody stupid!

Witch Hunting!

Folks, there's a long-established body of law that governs civil-rights and discrimination against protected classes, and it goes back to the days when people suffering abuse and discrimination were appropriately fearful of retribution if they sought their legal rights. Or even worse, if they complained about mistreatment during a time when they had no legal rights. This has been true of African-Americans, other racial minorities, women, gays and lesbians, and the elderly and handicapped, Mark. There's good reason why the use of "testers" in ensuring the rights of protected classes in interstate commerce is both legal and just.

I'm not a lawyer, but I do know this.

You both are and are not right . . .

Yes, testers have long been used, and frequently for valid and good purpose, but unfortunately all we know of this case is the one article, and according to that this appears bogus (it's very hard to tell, as we don't know what job they were applying for, but doesn't look right). Robin, if you ran a restaurant, and two applicants came in for a wait-staff job, one 25, energetic, and experienced, and one 65, energetic, and experienced, must you hire the older applicant? Is there a reasonable reason to hire the younger one? It's just not a clear-cut decision, especially when one is only looking at a grand total of two applicants!

As I said, if there had been complaints (anonymous complaints are permitted under federal statute), or if there had been multiple pairs of testers, or if there had been a corporate-wide trend of hiring, then they have a problem. In my misspent youth, at one point I ran a factory in Ohio, and every year I had to fill out forms (both state and federal) detailing the ethnicity, age, et al of all of my employees. I can't believe a company the size of Texas Roadhouse wouldn't have been doing this also. Perhaps if these reports demonstrated discrimination it might be reasonable, but judging just from the article it is not a worthwhile suit.

[Robin Garr]

judging just from the article i

And of course, that's the issue here. Business First fills a niche, but I'm not sure I'd consider it a newspaper of record.

That being said, though, I know enough of civil-rights law that I'm not going to join a chorus yelling that the principle of testers in discrimination issues is inappropriate or unfair.

Also, even going by what's in the article, Texas Roadhouse has not been tried nor convicted. As I interpret it, they're trying to call the whole thing off and avoid scrutiny entirely on the basis of testers being used without an individual complaint.

The EEOC suit alleges widespread age discrimination going back years. This suit was filed in 2011, documenting cases dating back to 2007. The article states ... in a document filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Dec. 17, the EEOC submitted a preliminary list of 77 potential claimants, people who claim they were discriminated against by Texas Roadhouse, from across the country."

So not exactly 2 applicants. That was an example used, not the whole case.

Based on what has been said:

1. Sample size is very low. If you are going to use testers, you need at least 150 pairs to get reasonable significance. 1 pair is far from enough.

2. Does this qualify as entrapment? Prosecutions get tossed all the time when government agents entice someone to violate the law. This might not fit, but seems borderline.

The EEOC suit alleges widespread age discrimination going back years. This suit was filed in 2011, documenting cases dating back to 2007. The article states ... in a document filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Dec. 17, the EEOC submitted a preliminary list of 77 potential claimants, people who claim they were discriminated against by Texas Roadhouse, from across the country."

So not exactly 2 applicants. That was an example used, not the whole case.

Did you ever think of working for Business First? Seems in not very much time and in only one paragraph you did a MUCH better job than their reporter did!

Fascinating stuff.

This is filling the gap in my life left by the season finale of Serial.