Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Title ix race discrimination
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Title ix race discrimination
Discrimination According to Eisenhower (1959, March 13), “I believe that the United States as a government, if it is going to be true to its own founding documents, does have the job of working toward that time when there is no discrimination made on such inconsequential reason as race, color, or religion” (Eisenhower, 1959 March 13). In this paper I am going to discuss a case where an employer argued BFOQ (bona fide occupational qualifications), should Title VII apply to every company regardless of the number of employees, and should race and color be permissible bona fide occupational qualifications. Case Where a Employer Argued BFOQ The case that I found where an employer argued BFOQ is Russell v. Microdyne Corporation. According to RUSSELL v. MICRODYNE CORPORATION (n.d.), the plaintiff’s name is Marie Russell, who filed suit against Microdyne Corp., her employer at the time. She alleged that they discriminated against her because she was a woman, which is in violation of Title VII. Her complaint alleged that she had been denied a promotion, been sexually harassed in the workplace, and been punished for opposing those advancements. During litigation, Microdyne found out that Marie Russell failed to tell them about previous work experience and if they had known, they wouldn’t have hired her to begin with. (RUSSELL v. MICRODYNE CORPORATION, n.d.). …show more content…
Relevant Law Used by the Court to Determine the Outcome of This Case According to Kellner (2006, October), the Russell v.
Microdyne Corporation case the courts used after-acquired evidence to make a decision on this case. They used this because the employer, Microdyne Corp., discovered Russell’s job application didn’t divulge the whole truth about her past employers, her previous salary, and her reason for leaving her last employer. That is why, in this case, the trial court granted the employer summary judgment, based upon after-acquired evidence (Kellner, 2006
October). Facts From the Researched Situation As stated above, plaintiff Russell claimed she was discriminated against under Title VII, by her employer. Her employer argued BFOQ, because plaintiff lied about her previous work experience and salary. Microdyne Corporation argued that if they had known about those two things, they wouldn’t have hired her in the first place. Should Title VII Apply to Every Company Regardless of Number of Employees According to Know Your Rights: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (n.d.), “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, and religion. It generally applies to employers with 15 or more employees, including federal, state, and local governments. Title VII also applies to private and public colleges and universities, employment agencies, and labor organizations” (Know Your Rights: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, n.d.). I think all companies should have Title VII in place, no matter how many employees they have, because discrimination can happen anywhere. It doesn’t matter how small the company is, it matters what kind of people that company has working for them. Should Race and Color Be Permissible Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications According to Bona Fide Occupational Qualification Law & Legal Definition (n.d.), bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ) are employment qualifications that employers are allowed to consider while making decisions about hiring and firing of employees. The BFOQ should relate to essential job duties that are considered necessary for operation of a business. The BFOQ rule allows for the hiring of individuals based on race, sex, age, and national origin if these characteristics are BFOQ. BFOQ is an exception to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees from discrimination about religion, sex, age, national origin, and color at the workplace (Bona Fide Occupational Qualification Law & Legal Definition, n.d.). I think race and color should be permissible BFOQ because a company should hire people based on their qualifications not on their race or color. According to Eisenhower (1959, March 13), “I believe that the United States as a government, if it is going to be true to its own founding documents, does have the job of working toward that time when there is no discrimination made on such inconsequential reason as race, color, or religion” (Eisenhower, 1959 March 13). In this paper I discussed a case that an employer argued BFOQ, should Title VII apply to every company regardless of number of employees, and that race and color should be permissible bona fide occupational qualifications.
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.
Over the past 15 years tremendous awareness has been raised around this and programs of preferential treatment emerged. These programs ensured equal rights for people of color and females in the work place, allowing for them to apply for executive level positions and earn the same amount of money, benefits, and prestige as a white male ensuring equality for all race and sex. Lisa Newton argues that, “reverse discrimination does not advance but actually undermines equality because it violates the concept of equal justice under law for all citizens. In addition, to this theoretical objection to reverse discrimination, Newton opposes it because she believes it raises insoluble problems.” Among them are determining what groups have been sufficiently discriminated against in the past to deserve preferred treatment in the present and determining the degree of reverse discrimination that will be compensatory. Newton outlines the importance of ensuring her argument is recognized as logically distinct from the condition of justice in the political sense. She begins her argument for reverse discrimination as unjustified by addressing the “simple justice” claim requiring that we favor women and blacks in employment and education opportunities. Since women and blacks were unjustly excluded from such opportunities for so many years in the not so distant past, however when employers and schools favor women and blacks, the same injustice is done. This reverse discrimination violates the public equality which defines citizenship and destroys the rule of law for the areas in which these favors are granted. To the extent that we adopt a program of discrimination, reverse or otherwise, justice in the political sense is destroyed, and none of us, specifically affected or no is a citizen, as bearers of rights we are all petitioners
Throughout this movie racism is a strong notable factor in Mabo’s struggle for justice. There are a lot of people experienced racism from everyday life. Protagonist Mabo sensed the discrimination from the pub and hotel. These two experiences of racism motivated him fight for his island. Through these key points, this essay will explain this topic as a deliberation.
...thin. That is exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court did. They defined that a hostile environment exists when unwelcome sexual conduct “has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with job performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.” With guidance of the EEOC, The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling was that hostile environment could exist separately from quid pro quo harassment and found Taylor and Meritor Bank guilty. This set the precedence for future sexual discrimination cases.
“You would really be pretty if you lose weight”, maybe this sounds polite and kind of innocent but the actual tone and deeper meanings are very discriminatory. The Discrimination At Large by Jennifer Coleman is an article where the author demonstrates the price for being obese. Overweight people are being criticized all the time by many people. Moreover, they are now a mockery since people just make fun of them for their amusement. The movie Shallow Hal also shows how if we change our general idea of outer beauty of a person, we could benefit from it. Obesity has been a serious dilemma for the people in America. The society seems to not change their perception about obese people. In addition, people who are usually afraid to say any kind of
As a result, this paper reasons that the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action because it cannot be fairly applied in the United States of America today. However, affirmative action itself should be permitted to be used in case the state once again unfairly discriminates social groups.
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
Disparate Impact arises when an employer's practices unintentionally excludes a protected class disproportionately (Player, Shoben and Lieberwitz, 1995). A "protected class" is a group of people, with common characteristics, which Congress has determined must be protected from inequality ("On-the-Job Discrimination: Gender Discrimination," 2004). This paper will analyze the landmark disparate impact case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (401 U.S. 424, 1971) from its beginning to its conclusion in the Supreme Court. Included will be the facts of the case and the issues detailed, as well as the history of the case from initial filing to final ruling.
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.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,
Based on Title VII of the Civil Right Act, it is unlawful to refuse hiring of an individual based on his or her color, race, sex, national origin or religion. It also prohibit an employer from segregating, classifying or limiting his or her applicant or employees in any way based on their color, race, national origin or religion (Supreme Court of the United States,
Schipani, C. (2013). Class Action Litigation After Dukes: In Search of a Remedy for Gender Discrimination in Employment. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 46(4), 1249-1277.
The 1964 Civil Rights Act and its 1972 Title VII Amendment are federal directives that monitor unfair labor employment practices. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made leaps towards equal opportunities for all United States citizens (Doerner, 2016). This act impacted law enforcement job qualifications as it did all other career qualifications. With this act came the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which allowed federal regulations of employment by all employers and protects people from being excluded because of age, race, religion, sex, and color (Rose 1989). These federal regulations prevented law enforcement from denying a person employment just because they were African American or Hispanic. During this time that this act was passed,
As the new HR director of a large corporation I would actively conduct research on discrimination and non-discrimination policies. I would want to make sure I cover every area or form of discrimination. Many companies in my experience simply follow the rules of that particular state. I find this insufficient because many states have different laws and/or ideas of what or who can be considered as being harassed. Being an international company I will make sure that I follow the guidelines of federal law and taking in consideration that the company will be working closely with those from Asian background. The policy I would create would be a follows:
This chapter has presented some common issues that plague employers around the country. Companies have continued to evolve, they look for ways improve and define job criterions and assessments. These methods establish identifying traits that the best applicant should possess for different types of employment opportunities. It is imperative that the applicant’s rights balance the scales of prescreening. The case overview in this assignment looks at how measuring prescreening test as a condition of employment can create conflicts with the Title VII protected classes and rights of the applicants in this case.