System addresses 'applicant' dilemma: Web-exclusive recruiting process takes compliance burden off HR's shoulders - HR Technology: Systems & Solutions - Statistical Data Included

HR Magazine, Sept, 2002 by Bill Roberts

For all its appeal, Internet recruiting has added fuel to a long-smoldering debate between federal contractors and the government over affirmative action compliance. A once-minor irritation became major when resumes started flooding company web sites.

Three questions lie at the heart of the matter. Who is an applicant? Is everyone in the resume database an applicant for each opening? How do you deal fairly and consistently with all resumes, especially those that are unsolicited?

"There isn't any issue as thorny as this one," says Joe DuBray Jr., regional director for the Mid Atlantic region of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) in Philadelphia. The OFCCP and federal contractors have wrestled with the definition of "applicant" for about five years, he adds.

But Air Products and Chemicals Inc. of Allentown, Pa., solved the problem. Through forced choices on its web site, the company has shifted the burden of declaring candidacy for a specific job to the resume submitter, which eliminates any non-compliant screening. "We think Air Products has hit the mark," says DuBray.

Air Products' solution weaves technology, business process, federal regulations and common sense. It is a model of how government and business can work together on HR problems that arise from new technologies.

Opening the Flood Gates

Air Products, which has 16,000 employees worldwide, including 9,000 in the United States, supplies gases and chemicals to industry and government. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is a big customer, buying liquid hydrogen for space shuttles.

Previously, HR generalists at about 30 sites handled recruiting, much of which the company outsourced to search firms. In October 1999, as part of a reorganization of its domestic HR function, the company moved to centralized staffing. Jim Brockington, former director of university recruiting, became director of central staffing. The web, which the company was not using, would eventually play a key role in sourcing and managing applications.

But Brockington's team got sidetracked for several months while Air Products tried to acquire portions of British Oxygen Co. of the United Kingdom. The company stopped recruiting, holding openings for employees added in the takeover. Then in June 2000, the Federal Trade Commission rejected the proposed acquisition.

"As a result, we had hundreds of unfilled jobs. The flood gates opened," says Brockington. "We immediately started to do some Internet recruiting using Monster.com and other sites. The problem is, we didn't have a place to dump those applications. They would come to us over e-mail, shutting down the e-mail system two or three times a day."

Brockington looked at several resume-management products. As a federal contractor, Air Products must open positions to interested people of every race and gender, and it must audit its recruiting efforts. Federal regulations prohibit arbitrarily screening our anyone. Brockington asked vendors whether their products could meet these requirements, but their answers were unsatisfactory, he said.

Who Is an Applicant?

The vendors weren't the only problem. Before the web existed, federal contractors and compliance officials debated the meaning of "applicant." A definition is in the March 2, 1979, Federal Register (Vol. 44, No. 43), DuBray says. The pertinent portion states:

"The precise definition of the term applicant depends upon the user's recruitment and selection procedures. The concept of an applicant is that of a person who has indicated an interest in being considered for hiring, promotion or other employment opportunities."

The Department of Labor liked the second sentence while industry liked the first, says DuBray. However, disagreement was a minor irritant before the web era because most companies more or less accepted as applicants anyone who expressed interest.

Because the web enables companies to develop larger applicant pools and collect many unsolicited resumes, the conflict worsened. The OFCCP argued that a resume submitted over the web is an expression of interest, and the company's acceptance of a resume automatically makes the submitter an applicant, says Brockington.

Air Products used to define an applicant as anyone who interviewed for a job, says Deb Kantner, a senior corporate recruiter. "Our record-keeping and reporting abilities were complex, given that our staffing efforts were spread out across the country and across business units." Managing unsolicited resumes and complying with regulations was always difficult, even before Internet recruiting, she says.

When the company moved recruiting efforts to the web, HR had hoped it could do better. Each year Air Products gets 20,000 to 40,000 resumes, many unsolicited. "What do you do with all those?" asks Brockington. "How do you deal with them consistently and fairly?"

Collaboration

With vendors offering no help, Brockington turned to his equal opportunity officer, Joe Trella, who suggested they meet with district OFCCP director Jackie Bell in Philadelphia. The national OFCCP director, Charles James, had recently said he wanted to work with contractors to find compliance solutions.