Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pay gap between genders essay
Equality for women getting paid the same as men
Pay gap between genders essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pay gap between genders essay
practice in issue here is the payment to women employed as stewardesses of salaries lower than those paid to men serving as pursers for work found by the court to be substantially equal. Others are the provision to stewardesses of less desirable layover accommodations and allowances for maintenance of uniforms, and the imposition of weight restrictions upon stewardesses only (Laffey v. Northwest Airlines Inc P Laffey, 1976).
In PHILLIPS v. MARTIN MARIETTA CORP (1971), Petitioner Mrs. Ida Phillips commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleging that she had been denied employment because of her sex. The District Court granted summary judgment
According to the court case on Pam Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., I am in agreement with the fact that the “district court granted summary judgment in favor of Huber” (Morgan, p.413) and that Wal-Mart gave Pam Huber, a maintenance associated job due to her disability. In doing so, I am also in agreement with the fact that Wal-Mart did not breach the American with Disability Act of 1990 due to the fact that Wal-Mart specifically stated what was required of Pam Huber to do on the job. Due to that, I am in agreement with Wal-Mart’s decision to hire a capable candidate in replace of Pam Huber due to their policy.
My Response. I think the court made the right decision by granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgement as to the plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim, since her gender was not a contributing factor in this case. However, regarding the law in this case, I find it strange that just because Lynch treated both men and women equally badly, this would nullify Smith’s claim for hostile work environment sexual harassment, when such harassment clearly took place. Why does the harassment have to be towards one sex only for there to be a valid legal case? Should it not be enough that she was subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment?
One of the issues in the case EEOC v. Target Corp. is that the EEOC alleged that Target violated the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by engaging in race discrimination against African-American applicants who were interested in management positions. It is argued that Target did not give the opportunity to schedule an interview to plaintiffs, Kalisha White, Ralpheal Edgeston and Cherise Brown-Easley, because of racial discrimination. On the other hand, it argues that Target is in violation of the Act because the company failed to retain and present records that would determine if there was reason to believe that an unlawful practice had been committed.
The Tucker vs. Walgreen Company was a nationwide known class action case. It fell into the category of race discrimination. This cases was brought to the attention of the law by African Americans who were employed at this retail and pharmacy store. This pledged that they were being discriminated to by the following acts:failure to move up in positions (promotion), dieing them the opportunity to apply for assistant manager and manager, and being assigned to an undesirable store for an extended period of time compared to whites. They filed a class action lawsuit with the demand of compensatory and punitive damages and declaratory and injunctive relief. Along with these demands, the plaintiffs desired class certification for those who have been previously affected by the defendant’s discriminatory acts as well as any who will suffer from them in the future.
The names and sex of all of the Junior Executive Secretaries that were terminated are important to this case. A wrongful termination, Title VII claim was brought against Greene’s. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states, individuals are protected against discrimination on bases of sex, religion, race, color, and national origin. Knowing all of the terminated Junior Executive Secretaries sex, can determine whether there was a male employee terminated as well. A male working within that title would suggest Greene’s did not terminate Ms. Lawson due to her
"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." ():-. Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm on Mar 17, 2014
Munition-ettes suffered the flaws in the system of gender bias when looking at equal pay: "many [women] left low-skill, low-wage jobs, especially in domestic service, for better paying skilled labor in ...
"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.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (n.d.). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Retrieved November 20, 2014, from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm
The majority group, whose ruling settled matters, included Breyer, Roberts, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Alito. The minority dissenting group included Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas. The majority held that Peggy Young was right, and gave a sufficient explanation of her claim of pregnancy discrimination. The court overturned the District Court and the Court of Appeal Fourth Circuit, indicating that both erred in their decisions. Justice Breyer read out the opinion held by the court that Title VII of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act is clear on the prohibition of sex discrimination, which applies to pregnancy-based discrimination. The law states that: “employers must treat women affected by pregnancy... the same for all employment-related purposes… as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work” (Legal Information
To resolve the gender wage gap, the government should consult with employers in federally-regulated sectors to apply a gender-based analysis to the design, development, implementation and evaluation of the policy. The law should clearly outline the systematic discrimination that women face in the workforce. This policy would entail employers to determine whether gender-based disparities exists and reevaluate the current pay system from an equity perspective to ensure and promote pay transparency. The law of ensuring pay equity should first be applied to the public sector, including federal public servants, employees of Crown cooperation and federally regulated companies. After this law has been found to be effective, it is also recommended that private corporations follow the same suit and comply with the pay equity
Bennett, Alexander, Hartman (2003), Employment Law for Business, Fourth Edition II. Regulation of Discrimination in Employment 3. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The McGraw-Hill Companies.
The Equal Pay Act (part of the Fair Labor Standards Act), forbids employers to compensate women differently for jobs that are “substantially equal”, that is, almost identical. Traditionally, women have worked in different occupations than men; these occupations tend to be substantially different, pay less and confer less authority.
Women’s right to equal pay or gender pay gap has been a subject of discussion over the years in the united states, women perform similar jobs to men, but are paid
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants and employees because of their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Religious Discrimination as part of the Civil Rights Act is the subject of this term paper.