MAN 3310 Module 2 Fair Hiring Discussion Example

Course	MAN-3310 Human Resources Management
Module	Module 2
Paper type	Discussion forum: initial post and two replies
Length	About 469 words
Format	Discussion post with APA 7 citations
School	Thomas Edison State University
Program	B.S.B.A. in Human Resources/Organizational Management
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for MAN 3310 Module 2

Discussion: Fair Treatment in Hiring

Should Store Managers See Applicants' Names? Blind Screening at a Supermarket Chain

Tuckahoe Markets, the composite 11-store South Jersey supermarket chain I am using in this course, receives about 9,000 online applications a year, and store managers choose whom to interview. The chain's HR director has proposed hiding applicants' names and addresses from managers during that first screen. Our textbook explains that employers must ensure fair treatment under laws such as Title VII, and that discrimination can occur through practices that are neutral on their face as well as through deliberate bias (Jackson et al., 2017). The question is whether blind screening would help here.

The evidence that names matter is strong. Bertrand and Mullainathan (2004) sent fictitious résumés to employers in Boston and Chicago and found that résumés with names commonly associated with white applicants received about 50% more callbacks than otherwise identical résumés with names associated with Black applicants. One might hope this has changed, but Quillian et al. (2017) combined every available field experiment since 1989 and found that white applicants received on average 36% more callbacks than equally qualified Black applicants, with no decline over 25 years, and 24% more than Latino applicants, with modest improvement.

I support the HR director's proposal, with two additions. Blind screening addresses only the first step; bias can return at the interview. So the chain should also use the same structured interview questions in every store and track interview and hiring rates by group each quarter to see whether the change is working. Second, addresses should be hidden too, since neighborhood can signal race and income. I would like to hear whether anyone has seen blind screening tried, and whether managers found ways around it.

Reply to Brianna

Brianna, you raise a fair concern that blind screening could slow hiring when stores need staff quickly. I would argue the cost is small compared with the risk. Quillian and colleagues' (2017) results suggest that unexamined screening leaves qualified applicants out at a steady rate, which also means managers are passing over people they would want to hire. If the online system simply masks two fields, managers lose no time. Do you think the delay you are worried about would come from the software or from managers resisting the change?

Reply to Kevin

Kevin, I agree that structured interviews matter more than masking names, but I do not think it is either-or. Our textbook stresses that fair treatment depends on every stage of selection being job related (Jackson et al., 2017), and the name screen is the first stage where an applicant can be lost. Your restaurant's practice of having two managers score each interview is a good example of reducing bias at the later stage. Would your company be open to adding the masking step at the start as well?

References

Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American Economic Review, 94(4), 991-1013. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828042002561

Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Werner, S. (2017). Managing human resources (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Quillian, L., Pager, D., Hexel, O., & Midtbøen, A. H. (2017). Meta-analysis of field experiments shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(41), 10870-10875. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706255114

Reading the MAN 3310 Module 2 assignment instructions

MAN-3310 has five graded discussions plus an ungraded introductions forum. Taking part means opening the thread with your own answer and then responding to at least two classmates in a way that moves the conversation; bare agreement is not counted, so give reasons whether you agree or not. You are graded on the quality and quantity of participation, and posts should be proofread, professional and respectful. Discussions in the early modules often concern the legal environment and fair treatment of employees and applicants. Use the Jackson, Schuler and Werner text and outside research to support your view. Use the course text plus at least one research source in your initial post.

How this MAN 3310 Module 2 example is built

The initial post states a concrete policy question at a specific employer, then summarizes the textbook's view of fair treatment in one sentence. Two research sources establish the size and persistence of the problem, with their key figures. The post takes a position and adds two practical safeguards, then ends by inviting classmates to share experience. The first reply engages a classmate's concern about speed with evidence and a question; the second agrees partly with another classmate, explains why both steps matter and asks whether the classmate's employer would add the step. Each response cites a source. Every response in the thread cites a source, as the course expects.

Where the marks sit in the MAN 3310 Module 2 rubric

Discussion grades in MAN-3310 reflect quality and quantity: a timely initial post that answers the question with course concepts and evidence, at least two replies that state and support a position, and professional, proofread writing. Mentors look for engagement with what classmates actually said, not generic praise. Using research accurately, including its scope, and connecting it to a real practice demonstrates the analytic ability the course emphasizes. Respectful disagreement is welcome and often earns more credit than agreement, as long as it is supported. Five forums carry the discussion share of the grade, so each one counts. Posting on time matters, since classmates need something to respond to. Respectful tone on a sensitive subject is part of the professional standard.

MAN 3310 Module 2 help from the desk

Discussion posts on discrimination sometimes rely on opinion or personal anecdote alone. Bring in evidence and the textbook's framework. Another weak spot is replies that restate your own post; respond to the classmate's specific point. Keep the tone respectful on sensitive topics, and describe groups and practices accurately. Avoid legal conclusions you cannot support; say what the law requires in general terms and cite your source. Post early so classmates can reply. Our writers can draft a MAN 3310 discussion post and replies on the question your mentor posted, set in a workplace you know. Read every classmate reply to your post and answer at least one of them.

Write yours, or have the desk draft it

This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.

More MAN 3310 and B.S.B.A. in Human Resources/Organizational Management sample papers

MAN 3310 Module 2 questions, answered

Where can I find a free MAN 3310 Module 2 sample paper?

This page presents the full fair-hiring discussion: an initial post on blind screening at a supermarket chain and two replies, each arguing its point with a citation, plus explanatory notes.

How many discussions does MAN-3310 have?

Five graded discussions plus an ungraded introductions forum. Each one needs your own opening answer and two substantive responses to classmates.

Does hiring discrimination still occur?

Pooling field experiments since 1989, researchers found white applicants got roughly 36% more callbacks than Black applicants with matching resumes, a gap that had not narrowed in 25 years.

What is blind screening?

Hiding information such as names and addresses from those who review applications, so early screening focuses on qualifications.

What makes a discussion reply count in MAN-3310?

It must add value and advance the discussion. Whichever side you take, explain why and point to evidence.