Is it legal to lower the required min quals of jobs for employees vs ext cands

I agree with Ms. Pastor's assessment 100%. Since you said you are a government employer, you need to look at your own regulations carefully. Many times the government for whom you work places restrictions on how you can assess employees' eligibility and who you should hire. If no restrictions are set forth, then an employer may make just about any requirement they want as long as their practices don't have a disparate impact on a protected class, as described by Ms. Pastor. As for the current employees' concerns, you would have to take a look on a case-by-case basis as to whether the grade needs to be revised - that inquiry is a little vague to give a good answer.

posted by Jeanne M. Valentine  |  Nov 20, 2010 07:45 AM [EST]

To establish disparate treatment or discrimination, the "external candidates" would need to show that they were treated differently based on a category protected under federal or state law.

In other words, it will not be sufficient to allege that the employer discriminated against external candidates by applying a different standard. Rather, the external candidates would need to show that this disparate treatment, i.e., the different minimum qualification required, was based on the sex, race, national origin, age or disability of those candidates, or on some other protected status.

Alternatively, the external candidates would need to establish that the different minimum qualification standard had a disparate impact on those candidates falling within a protected category of candidates.

It is unlikely that such a case can be made as there is clearly a reasonable non-discriminatory basis for preferring to hire from within.

*This opinion is based on the assumption that the inquiry is made by a private employer. Similar circumstances in public employment may be affected by additional factors, including government regulations.

posted by Patricia Pastor  |  Nov 19, 2010 3:27 PM [EST]