Benefits and costs of EEO rules in construction

Koehn, E and Jones, M W (1983) Benefits and costs of EEO rules in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 109(4), pp. 435-446. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The findings of a study designed to investigate the benefits and costs of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) regulations in the construction industry are presented. The data indicate that large contractors have less difficulty than smaller organizations in meeting EEO requirements. In addition, it is shown that the regulations both benefit and increase the number of minority construction workers. According to the study, however, EEO procedures have not increased the number of qualified minority craftsmen. The data also indicate that EEO regulations have increased the cost of the construction projects. The amount spent on both record keeping and low productive personnel, although significant, is not substantial. For example, the unweighted values, in terms of construction dollar volume, range from 1.05% for the Engineering News Record (ENR) 400 organizations to 2.31% for the Indiana Constructors. The weighted values range from 0.48% for the ENR 400 contractors to 1.55% for the Indiana Constructors. The great majority of firms surveyed indicated that EEO rules and regulations should be modified. Better recruiting efforts and comprehensive union and contractor programs to train competent workers appear to be a necessity.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: employment, construction worker, construction industry, craft worker, minority, personnel, regulation, program, construction project
Subjects: industry analysis, political science, sociology, production management, management, software systems, practitioner
Topics: Ethics, Human Resources, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Project Management, Governance, Roles and Professions
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here