Demographics Questions on Job Applications
Why these questions matter, even when they don't.
As a coach, I’m often asked a common question. I have avoided addressing this question in writing for a long time. Today I’ll try to give it some attention.
It goes like this:
I’m filling out a job application online. It’s asking me for my gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, if I am neurodivergent, or disabled… how should I answer them?
This question has always made me uncomfortable. It’s better posed to someone who has more experience coping with discrimination and how it’s affected them. It’s also disquieting because it forces me to admit that people who look like me don’t need to worry much about bias in the recruiting process.
Hating and avoiding the question hasn’t gotten me very far. I’m going to break my own rule and attempt to supply an answer.
For perfect clarity, I’ll place it right here, below between these dim horizontal lines:
I don’t know. I am truly sorry that you have to ask.
If being asked demographics questions during a job application makes you feel vulnerable during the recruiting process, know that you’re not alone. Many people have confessed the same concern to me.
From my perspective, any answer you give to these demographic questions is the correct one. I support your choices 100%, whatever they are.
If being asked those questions does not make you feel uncomfortable, know that this is a privilege in itself. Let’s try not to grow too comfortable with it. For people in a position to influence the hiring process, we should recognize the discomfort caused by these questions and understand they’re not ok.
The whole thing pisses me off, and I know we can do better.
Asking the wrong questions
As I’ve struggled with this subject, I’ve been asking clients for their opinions and I’ve gotten contradictory answers.
Some have said that one should answer demographic questions truthfully, especially if you’re part of an under-represented minority. Representation matters, they say.
I agree with that.
Some people have told me that they feel it’s inevitable that the information will be used to discriminate against them somehow. They often give a “Prefer not to answer” answer, or they just bail out of the application altogether.
That really sucks. But it’s a reasonable decision, and I support you completely.
Some queer friends have shared with me their despair that questions about sexual orientation, gender identity, or other so-called “demographics” have any business on a job application at all.
(Personally, when I am asked on a job application whether I identify as bisexual, pansexual, or queer, I give a completely honest and truthful answer which is “You go first.”)
Neurodivergent and disabled people — particularly chronically ill people who may or may not identify as disabled — are clearly disadvantaged by these questions. Discrimination against these people in the hiring process may be illegal, but it happens right out in the open every single day.
People have told me they assume that they’ll be immediately rejected if they disclose their status here. They’ve pointed out that they’ve rarely seen an application that went so far as to say “Neurodivergent, chronically ill, and disabled people are all welcome here.” I’ve certainly never come across that. Have you?
If you meet that description, whatever answer you give to these questions, I’m with you all the way.
Finally, I have spoken with some HR folks whose hearts I know for a fact were cast in the celestial foundries from pure solid unadulterated gold. They told me that it is only through the collection of this data through a process like this that we can hope to understand our progress towards equity and justice.
That sounds at least plausible, as well. I mean, doesn’t it?
From all of these conflicting ideas, I can only conclude that we’re all either right, we’re all wrong, or most likely both. I can respect almost any answer.
Except for that last one from the HR department. That’s a load of shit. Here’s why.
Good and bad reasons
Whatever the intent of these question, they have the effect for a lot of folks of making the process seem less fair. Everyone I’ve spoken to who isn’t part of the white patriarchy — and many who are — has expressed discomfort, apprehension, and aversion to these demographic questions.
U.S. corporations will be quick to tell you that they’re required by law to collect data on their workforce in order to supply the federal government with data that proves their hiring practices are not discriminatory.
Corporations are of course fond of telling us that government regulations are the reason why we can’t have nice things like workforce equity or a copy of our own fucking medical records. This almost always turns out to be bullshit.
I’m not qualified to investigate this, but I did anyway, and it seems this is no exception. It seems to be fashionable for people to reflexively insist that the federally-mandated reporting requires the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) questions on the applications. I looked into it and as far as I can tell, it does not.
The EEOC’s own FAQ puts it this way:
Q: Does the EEO-1 Component 1 Report require data on applicants who were not hired or employed during the selected workforce snapshot pay period?
A: No. The EEO-1 Component 1 Report only requires data on current employees during the selected workforce snapshot pay period.
That seems pretty clear. I could be wrong, but until proven otherwise, I am maintaining a call of “bullshit” on this. I think the real reason these questions are being asked of every applicant is to preemptively collect data to defend against lawsuits — perhaps especially class-action ones with a large number of plaintiffs — alleging institutional bias in hiring practices.
If that’s true, it casts an even darker and more cynical pall on the practice of dressing up this disconcerting behavior in the garb of social justice.
Regardless of the reason, I cannot avoid the simple, sad conclusion that these despicable hiring practices have the effect of excluding the very people who they are ostensibly meant to help.
Transparency and trust
The largest employers in the world are frequently and famously accused of systematic discrimination, overt and implicit bias, privacy transgressions, and violations of other workplace rules and laws in nearly every country in the world.
These same companies, in their very first conversations with their future employees, are asking them to waive their expectation that the company be deprived of information that might be used to illegally bias their hiring decisions.
They ask us to trust that the information is being used for a legitimate purpose, even though they’re routinely caught misusing our private information. This apparent hypocrisy doesn’t even warrant enough notice to cause employers to make an effort to assure us that the information will not be used against us.
This occurs thousands of times each day, during transactions in which the employer is obviously in a position of tremendous power over the candidate, in a process that may well be among the most consequential of that person’s life.
At a minimum, companies should be required to affirm that this information is not used any one for any purpose at any time during the hiring process. Does this even need to be said?
At a minimum, it should be illegal for any demographic information gathered for the stated purpose of complying with the law to be used for any other purpose.
At a minimum, companies who want to be seen as welcoming to these same communities should be more thoughtful about which questions they pose and how, regardless of what or whether they are required by law to ask.
Getting better
To corporations, I say this: people who feel vulnerable and at risk are repelled if not repulsed by the way you’ve chosen to present these questions in the recruiting process. Fix it.
Your recruiting process is not inclusive if it makes the people it’s meant to protect feel unsafe.
Here’s one idea: Are you spending millions to attract these same people in your rainbow sponsorships and your DEI campaigns?
Why don’t you spend some of that money talking to those people instead? Drop me a line and I’ll give you some names of folks you can pay to tell you what a more inclusive process could look like.
Every job should be equally available to every person. No person should fear that an answer they give during the application process could be used to discriminate against them.