Great article on Wall Street sex discrimination cases includes food for thought for all employers

In this morning's law.com reading I found a great article about the Wall Street sex discrimination litigation that offers some interesting facts and tips for all employers.

Here's the thesis paragraph:

In the wake of the recent high-profile cases filed against Wall Street brokerage firms and other financial institutions, employers in the financial industry are particularly vulnerable to lawsuits alleging sexual harassment and gender discrimination. This article briefly examines why financial institutions have been the target of such lawsuits, the implications that the recent cases have for financial employers and the preventative steps employers can take to reduce their liability.

The article, published in The National Law Journal, is: "Reducing Sex Bias Liability on Wall Street" (by Richard H. Block and M. Alexis Pennotti)

Some interesting parts:

[W]omen held 43 percent of all jobs in the securities industry in 1999, but in 2003 they held only 37 percent of those jobs. In comparison, women represent 48 percent of the work force generally.

The recent cases stem in part from the National Association of Securities Dealers' (NASD) decision to stop requiring arbitration of discrimination claims.

This industry had actually pioneered such use of arbitration. It litigated many issues surrounding it, as employees resisted arbitration and raised many legal challenges to enforcement of arbitration agreements.

Perhaps the NASD wearied of the litigation costs associated with trying to save litigation costs through arbitration! In any event, the consequence seems to have been some huge, enormously costly class actions.

So as the first comment to my recent post on arbitration wisely indicates, the decision of whether to implement mandatory arbitration of employment claims is a tough one.

Also very interesting information in this article regarding jury biases (as of 1996):

The following examples provide insight into the current state of civil juries:

First, 72 percent of civil jurors surveyed believe that an important function of juries in the United States is to send messages to organizations to improve their behavior.

Second, more than 60 percent of civil jurors surveyed believe that large companies will lie to win a lawsuit.

Third, 88 percent of civil jurors surveyed would tend to believe an employee's allegations, over an organization's contentions, related to a dispute between the employee and the organization.

Fourth, 60 percent of civil jurors surveyed are open to awarding punitive damages.

Fifth, approximately 72 percent of civil jurors surveyed consider sexual harassment to be a common occurrence in the workplace and more than 65 percent of civil jurors surveyed believe that most organizations do not enforce their policies regarding harassment strictly.

Finally, 75 percent of civil jurors surveyed would tend to believe a woman who alleges she has been sexually harassed at work.

(Citing Daniel R. Gallipeau, "Choosing the Jury: Do's and Don't's for Voir Dire and Jury Selection," Advanced Employment Law and Litigation (Dec. 5, 1996), WL SB31 ALI-ABA 333.)

There's more, with significance beyond Wall Street. Read the whole story.