The laws on equal employment opportunity are designed to provide all workers fair consideration based on their job performance and not on any personal factors such as race, religion, gender, disability or genetic information. These laws have been enacted as extensions of the 14th Amendment and guarantees due process and equal protection against discrimination in the workforce. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces these laws ensuring that contractual commitments and Federal laws bind the employers in keeping their employment application processes within reasonable consideration of an applicant's background. Compliance with the standards of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and its amendments is expected from the employers and in this given case study, from the Gelato Cheese Company.
The passage of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 provided the EEOC the authority to regulate the Title VII compliance of employers with fifteen or more employees. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides protection against employment discrimination and prohibits employment discrimination of an individual “because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” (Section 703a, 1964). Gelato Cheese Company has one hundred workers with 75% of the workforce of white population who has completed high school against the 25 per cent from the minority groups and this information is important in considering Gelato’s is non-compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gelato’s requirement for the employment of its cleaning crew is for high school diploma holders, and obviously with the...
... middle of paper ...
...ifications are not disadvantaging people at different ages. Gelato must be able to justify the need for specific qualifications objectively with considerations on equivalent or similar level alternative qualifications. Gelato must always consider disparate treatment and its prohibition in the employment of individuals taking note of disparate treatment as a situation when a person is treated differently from others; and such treatment is intentional and based on any of the protected factors. The concept of adverse impact must also be considered as it may be unintentional and may apply to a protected group instead of an individual. The individuals from the minority groups are most often disregarded even with their mental or physical capabilities and are at the disadvantage of attaining a job as they are not part of the society’s dominating large white networks.
This policy was a direct violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which impacted the way Duke Power handled new standards for hiring, promotion, and transfer promotion, and transfers. In order to work in positions outside of the labor department, Duke Power Company now requires a high school diploma or scores on standardized IQ tests equal to those of the average high school graduate (Grigg’s). The new standard for hiring, promotions, and transfer was meant to provide a better workplace standard for all of the company. The thirteen African American employees of Duke Power Company did not feel this way, the employees lawyer Jack Greenberg argued against Duke Power Company policy changes in December 1970 by stating, “They effectively perpetuated the discriminatory policies that Duke Power had utilized prior to the enactment of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although the testing and diploma criteria disqualified African-Americans at a substantially higher rate than whites, Duke Power never established that they successfully measured ability to do the jobs in question”(NAACP).
Affirmative Action Question: Newton and Wasserstrom seem to disagree about whether affirmative action is a form of reverse discrimination. Explain how each arrives at their position about whether or not affirmative action is similar to or different from discriminatory laws of the Jim Crow era
"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the single most important piece of legislation that has helped to shape and define employment law rights in this country (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2001)". Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, age, gender, disability, religion and national origin. However, it was racial discrimination that was the moving force of the law that created a whirlwind of a variety of discriminations to be amended into Title VII. Title VII was a striving section of legislation, an effort which had never been tried which made the passage of the law an extremely uneasy task. This paper will discuss the evolution of Title VII as well as the impact Title VII has had in the workforce.
The idea that is being presented is that discrimination is taking a role in analyzing a person’s work ethic and educational background. This unfair descriptive process was and still is causing issues with native employment.
The merit system standards case is based on Congressman Wally Herger’s comments regarding the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) civil rights program (Reeves, 2006). In an attempt to persuade the House of Representatives that change was necessary, Herger quoted several United States Forest Service job announcements that included language such as “only unqualified applicants may apply” and “only applicants who do not meet Office of Personnel Management (OPM) qualification requirements will be considered” (Reeves, 2006). The This case study analysis will focus on the Forest Service’s unfair practice of actively recruiting and hiring unqualified applicants, the reasons for discontinuing this practice, and the increase in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaints due to this practice and suggestions for increasing diversity without compromising the merit system (Reeves, 2006).
In my opinion, it is important for private and public organizations to adopt and implement programs and laws to overcome the challenges in a diverse work environment. One of the laws that organizations follow are Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. Equal Employment Act of 1972 prohibits discrimination of employment on the basis of race, color, nation, origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political , beliefs , and marital status. Another law that
In today’s world, the American still has barriers to overcome in the matter of racial equality. Whether it is being passed over for a promotion at the job or being underpaid, some people have to deal with unfair practice that would prevent someone of color or the opposite sex from having equal opportunity at the job. In 2004, Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores Incorporation was a civil rights class-action suite that ruled in favor of the women who worked and did not received promotions, pay and certain job assignments. This proves that some corporations ignore the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which protects workers from discrimination based on sex, race, religion or national origin.
In order for John to file a discrimination complaint against his employer, he is required to file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Complaint counselor or representative of the company. Once the charge has been filed, an investigation is made, or the charge maybe selected to an EEOC program and maybe dismissed. In this case, John is given a certain number of days to file a lawsuit on his behalf. This process would have to go through several lengthy stages such as the EEOC administrative process. If gone to trial it must go through filing of a summons, response and answer, discovery process, enlisting of experts, pre-trial, actual trial and a possible appeal.
The federal government assists employees from being discriminated against in the workplace. Employment discrimination is covered under several key pieces of legislation that the government saw fit to put into place over the past 50 years. These include the following: The Civil Rights Act of 1964: Protects employees from being discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Equal Pay Act of 1963: Does away with discrimination in wages between women and men, when employed in the same position or job. The Age Discrimination Act of 1967: Prohibits age discrimination against individuals who are 40 years old or older. The Americans with disabilities Act of 1990: Protects people with disabilities from being discriminated against. The Genetic Nondiscrimination Act of 2008: Prevents an employer, or a potential employer, from discriminating against someone on the basis of genetic information that is known or
One problem that Americans are facing is the inequality between men and women, whether it is in everyday life or in a professional atmosphere. One step that has been taken toward equality was introduced with the Equal Pay Act of 1963, signed by President John F. Kennedy. This law was the first affecting the amount of job opportunities available for women and allowing them to work in traditionally male dominated fields. On the outside, this would sound like a solution where nothing could possibly go wrong, but it is not.
Pi-Yu, T.; Kleiner, B. (2001) Reasonable care of small business to prevent employment discrimination: Equal Opportunities International 20.5-7. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.prx-keiser.lirn.net/docview/199531356/141C90F559D461C1D51/1?accountid=35796
Research Question: This study questions whether men with disabilities and men with impairments have lower employment rates and job wages, due to prejudice and discriminatory acts. This project in interested in finding out the modifications in wages and the bias views on disabled men.
Employment, Inc is committed to a policy, as stated by the Federal Employment Equity, of achieving equality in the workplace so that no person is denied employment opportunities, pay or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability. Employment, Inc is therefore committed to equal employment opportunities, as stated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for all applicants and employees without regard to age, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, physical or mental disability or any other unlawful grounds. In order to ensure an equitable workplace, Employment, Inc abides by a number of objectives as required by law. These objectives consist of::Workforce Survey - a collection of data on existing employees and determine those that fall into one of the designated categories.
Another study and test with the purpose to empirically test this hypothesis by estimating different effect of age discriminations policies on older women and older men in the work force. The results in this study found huge differences between older women and older men in retirement and employment, which lead to the point that more discriminatory laws should be implemented to protect older women.
What exactly is workplace discrimination? (Statistic) It can be defined as a less favorable treatment towards an individual or a group of individuals at work, usually based on their nationality, skin color, sex, marital status, age, sexual orientation, or other defining attributes. It can appear as a denial of certain rights, negligent treatment, deliberate harassment or work results and achievements, and so on. A person can be discriminated by their coworkers or by the employer. Thesis: Gender inequality in the workplace is an ethically historic and significant issue which requires adequate solutions because it leads to unethical discrimination of women, minorities, and those who are members of the LGBT community. As a rule, discrimination