SmartTalent LLC, a staffing agency based in Washington, will pay $875,000 to settle a lawsuit alleging it complied with client requests for male workers, according to an Aug. 7 announcement.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charged SmartTalent, which places temporary employees with businesses across numerous industries, with a pattern of sex discrimination. It declined to hire and place women in certain job assignments since 2015, the agency said.
When the staffing agency received client requests for male workers, SmartTalent accommodated its clients rather than rejecting the requests as unlawful, EEOC found. In addition, the company denied placement opportunities for female workers and dissuaded some of its recruiters who voiced concerns.
“The customer is not always right and, as EEOC’s guidance for employment agencies makes clear, staffing agencies violate the law when they comply with a client’s sex-based preference, or a preference based on any other prohibited characteristic,” Nancy Sienko, an EEOC district director, said in a statement.
As part of the settlement, SmartTalent agreed to implement new anti-discrimination policies; train managers and recruiters on those policies; and hold those individuals accountable for compliance.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits an employment agency from fulfilling discriminatory employer preferences or making referrals based on sex, EEOC said. And eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring is an EEOC priority for 2024-2028, a regional attorney added.
EEOC enforcement in this space isn’t new, however. The commission reminded staffing firms that they can’t accommodate discriminatory hiring requests in 2022 when it announced that a Buffalo, New York, firm agreed to pay $550,000 to settle allegations that it rejected applicants or placed them in low-paying jobs due to race, gender, age, disability and pregnancy status.
Earlier this year, staffing firm BaronHR agreed to pay $2.2 million to settle claims it agreed to biased client requests. The company steered candidates toward certain positions based on sex and rejected others based on race and national origin, EEOC said.
