> The laws enforced by EEOC prohibit an employer or other covered entity from using neutral employment policies and practices that have a disproportionately negative effect on applicants or employees of a particular race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), or national origin, or on an individual with a disability or class of individuals with disabilities, if the polices or practices at issue are not job-related and necessary to the operation of the business. [0]
I am not a lawyer, but I am directly quoting the US Government Agency that is responsible for enforcing these laws.
US employment law prohibits a large number of normally OK employment practices when they have a disparate impact on protected classes.
> For example, an employer's reliance on word-of-mouth recruitment by its mostly Hispanic work force may violate the law if the result is that almost all new hires are Hispanic. [0]
In that case the targeted facebook ads would not be illegal if they were balanced by targeted ads at the groups excluded from the first? Or also not illegal if it can't be proven to have had an actual effect?
Is it Ok just because it’s overwhelming likely to be women who see it, versus algorithmically targeting women?