Report 2007-102.2 Recommendation 3 Responses
Report 2007-102.2: California State University: It Is Inconsistent in Considering Diversity When Hiring Professors, Management Personnel, Presidents, and System Executives (Release Date: December 2007)
Recommendation #3 To: University, California State
To ensure that campuses employ consistent search processes and develop appropriate policies, the university should issue systemwide guidance on the hiring process for management personnel. In developing this guidance, the university should instruct campuses to compare the proportions of women and minorities in the total applicant pool with the proportions in the labor pool to help assess the success of their outreach efforts in recruiting female and minority applicants. To help ensure that they have sufficient data from applicants to effectively compare these proportions, campuses could send reminders to applicants requesting them to submit information regarding their gender and ethnicity.
Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2013
The CSU takes seriously its obligation to effectively manage all aspects of its hiring policies and procedures while balancing state and federal regulations. Careful consideration must be given to whether any changes in these policies and procedures might be perceived to constitute an illegal preference in violation of Proposition 209. Notably, Proposition 209 exempts actions that are required by federal law to retain federal funding, but does not exempt actions not specifically required by federal law. In that regard, campuses are not required by federal affirmative action regulations to compare the proportions of women and minorities in the total applicant pool with the proportions in the labor pool to help assess the success of their outreach efforts in recruiting female and minority applicants. However, campuses are comparing the proportions of women and minorities in their current workforce by job groups with the proportions of women and minorities in the labor pool, as is required by federal affirmative action regulations. In addition, CSU continues to abide by affirmative action regulations by offering applicants an opportunity to voluntarily submit information regarding their gender and ethnicity and respecting the applicants' choice, even the choice not to provide demographics information.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement
Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From September 2012
The CSU takes seriously its obligation to effectively manage all aspects of its hiring policies and procedures while balancing state and federal regulations. Careful consideration must be given to whether any changes in these policies and procedures might be perceived to constitute an illegal preference in violation of Proposition 209. Notably, Proposition 209 exempts actions that are required by federal law to retain federal funding, but does not exempt actions not specifically required by federal law. In that regard, campuses are not required by federal affirmative action regulations to compare the proportions of women and minorities in the total applicant pool with the proportions in the labor pool to help assess the success of their outreach efforts in recruiting female and minority applicants. However, campuses are comparing the proportions of women and minorities in their current workforce by job groups with the proportions of women and minorities in the labor pool, as is required by federal affirmative action regulations. In addition, CSU continues to abide by affirmative action regulations by offering applicants an opportunity to voluntarily submit information regarding their gender and ethnicity and respecting the applicants' choice, even the choice not to provide demographics information.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement
All Recommendations in 2007-102.2
Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.