A man claiming he is a former Penn employee recently filed a complaint against the University, alleging employment discrimination on several different counts.
Gordon Roy Parker, a publisher and self-proclaimed activist, claims that during his employment at Penn, the University practiced racial, gender, disability, retaliation, creed and irrelevant criteria discrimination against him.
According to University Associate General Counsel Eric Tilles, Penn has no record of Parker ever applying for a job.
Parker alleges that in 1993, he was not given a promotion at the Penn Medical Center because of his race and gender, even though he believes his skills were more than adequate for the job. He is asking for a total of $351,000 in lost wages and damages.
Parker's main contention is that the affirmative action program in place at Penn not only works against individuals like himself seeking employment, but is also unnecessary for minorities and women to advance in certain occupations.
"As a white male secretary, I say yes, it's time to rethink affirmative action," he said. "I believe reverse discrimination is a problem."
At this point in the legal process, Parker still does not have an attorney, and an employment discrimination panel is reviewing his case in deciding whether or not to grant him counsel.
"We have agreed with him that the court should appoint a lawyer," Tilles said.
"We have not filed an answer and we do not think we have discriminated against him. We will probably be moving to dismiss the complaint," he added.
Parker said he plans to file an amended complaint, but has not yet done so, and Tilles said his office is waiting to respond until that is filed and Parker has legal representation.
In his complaint, Parker alleges that the University's affirmative action program "has resulted in wholesale, centralized, mass discrimination against him," primarily due to its "premise that white males are never discriminated against."
Throughout his complaint, Parker cites what he says are University statistics. Those statistics show, he claims, that African Americans are already over-represented in lower-level positions at Penn, and therefore there is no need for affirmative action at the University.
"Extending affirmative-action protection to minorities in job classifications where they are already over-represented... locks them into lower-paying jobs with minimal economic security," according to the complaint.
In terms of gender discrimination, Parker claims that "Penn's affirmative-action program provides unnecessary assistance to females in administrative-assistant positions within the University."
As an example, Parker includes statistics from the Office of General Counsel, which reveal that "approximately four out of five support staff, and all secretaries, receptionists, and all but one paralegal, are female."
Parker also points to a study that states women have a "beauty premium," and Parker believes that is why "attractive females are given ridiculous advantages in every stage of employment."
"There really isn't any help for the man looking to break into the female-dominated profession," Parker said.
According to the complaint, the "interpersonal appeal" that Parker's complaint says women have justifies Parker's claim of "disability status upon those individuals, including Plaintiff, who are not attractive females, on the grounds that they are genetically deformed."
Parker also alleges that he has been the victim of retaliation discrimination, since he is a "whistle-blower and civil rights activist, who has filed internal and now external grievances against Penn."
Additionally, the complaint states that since Parker strongly "believes it is morally wrong to not report wrongdoing or illegal behavior," his "whistle-blowing" behavior constitutes his creed, and Penn has practiced creed discrimination against him.
Finally, Parker's complaint includes an allegation of irrelevant criteria discrimination, which is based on the premise that "the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is unconstitutional on the grounds that it protects only some irrelevant hiring criteria, such as race and gender, but not others, such as political affiliation."
"Rather than keep duplicating the civil rights law, why not just protect all irrelevant criteria?" Parker asked. "If you protect some people, you should protect all people."
Parker said he has filed the complaint against Penn precisely because he likes working for Penn so much.
"I like Penn a lot as an employer. I wish more places had its benefits," he said, noting particularly his ability to take University classes for free. "That's why I consider it such a great loss. If they were a lousy employer, I doubt that I would be suing them."
He also said it is not only about the money he hopes to gain by filing this complaint.
"It's about money to the extent that you want recovered wages," he said.
"My dispute with them mainly centers around their institutional practices," he added. "It's about me leveling the playing field."
