When CNN highlights alleged workplace discrimination, you can bet a federal investigation will follow. So when the cable network ran a report in 2010 alleging pervasive bias in the Federal Air Marshal’s Service (FAMS), authorities braced for the worst.
The good news: The resulting government investigation didn’t uncover widespread discrimination.
The bad news: Investigators found that many FAMS employees believe they have been discriminated against.
The investigation, which focused on operations at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and several other airports nationwide, grew from a whistle-blower’s complaint thatinsulted workers with a whiteboard designed to look like the question board on the “Jeopardy!” game show. Categories allegedly were derogatory nicknames for women, blacks, Hispanics, gays, lesbians and veterans.
Investigators could not document widespread discrimination, but did uncover attitudes among rank-and-file personnel that they “feel discriminated against, fear retaliation, and believe there is much favoritism.”
A FAMS official acknowledged that poor communication might have contributed to worker perceptions of bias.
- No Motive, No Intent—No Problem; It Can Still Be Job Bias
- Beware potential new source of lawsuits: Lawyers try RICO in discrimination case
- Carefully track all discipline details to show you treat all employees fairly
- Let applicant decide if job threatens his health
- Not a federal case: Gospel music, incivility