Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Rights and responsibilities of age discrimination in employment
Case study of age discrimination act 2006
Rights and responsibilities of age discrimination in employment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction
The purpose of this assignment is to consider whether or not Gelato Cheese Company should make any changes in order to be in compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). This paper will discuss the definition of Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and its application in employment decisions. In order to be employed at Gelato Cheese Company for its cleaning crew, it is required that you have a high school diploma/ or GED equivalent and at the present moment, the company whole cleaning crew is under the age of 30 and white.
The case
Gelato Cheese Company is a company that is a processor of cheese and it is sold throughout the United States, the company has 200 employees at its processing plant with 85% of those employees being white, 15% other and 83% of its employees are between the ages of 25 and 35. In Heartland Corners, 75% of that population has completed high school and that percent is of the white population, compared to 25 percent of the other minority groups. The question is: How is this information important in considering whether Gelato is in compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits most of the discrimination and harassment in the workplaces. The provision of the Title VII covers all the state, local government, private employees as well as educational institutions that have at least 15 employees or more. The Act prohibits any discrimination that may be meted against the individuals on the basis of the origin, religion, sex, color, race, and national origin (http://topics.hrhero.com/title-vii-of-the-civil-rights-act-of-1964/).
...
... middle of paper ...
...aw suits filed against them for discrimination.
Avoiding discrimination
Gelato’s Cheese Company really needs to take a close look at the issues that they have and may encounter if they don’t make a change in their policy to make sure that they are in compliance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and also with the ADEA. This is really important because they can and may be faced with a discrimination law suit. Their entire cleaning crew that is employed at their processing plant is white and also under the age of 30. There may be certain educational requirements that are necessary for the job, but if the requirement purposely eliminates certain ethical/racial groups, it could be in violation of Title VII. It is really important that this company hires their employees based on fairness and not based on their ethnic background or what age they are.
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.
Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, gender, or religion. Race, color, national origin, gender, and religion are known as protected classes. The Supreme Court later established “several theories of discrimination that plaintiffs may purses based on the type of discrimination alleged.” (Melvin & Katz, 2015) The three most common theories are disparate treatment, mixed motives, and disparate impact. Aquino v. Honda is an example of disparate treatment as Aquino believe his was terminated, thus discriminated against, because of his race. Disparate Treatment is defined as “overt and intentional discrimination.” (Melvin & Katz, 2015)The burden of proof was on Honda to prove it had legitimate reason to terminate Aquino. The court ruled that Honda had met the burden of proof; the firing was not discriminatory as the accusations were not baseless nor did they amount to pretext. When the burned shifted back to Aquino to prove his firing was discriminatory in nature, he could not provide any
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).
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
"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." ():-. Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm on Mar 17, 2014
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed soon after the milestone March on Washington. In the largest march ever held in the United States, people of all races and colors gathered together to show legislature that racism would no longer be acceptable in society. Title VII, the section which deals with discrimination in the workforce is one small part of the larger piece of legislation. Title VII, of the Civil Rights Act, quickly became the most important arbiter of rights under the new law (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2001). The workforce has drastically changed since the passage of the act. Women and minorities are engaged in employment now more than ever. With the passage of Title VII, the door was opened to prohibiting job discrimination and creating fairness in employment (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2001). Soon after, protection against discrimination based on age and disability was provided.
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.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967, as amended, protects workers age forty and over in hiring, promotion, and termination decisions. This project is going to analyze the ADEA and its amendment in terms of effectiveness, ineffectiveness, and influence which will be demonstrated by employment cases, research data. The project shows that the ADEA is not as effective as it suppose to be and its purpose of prohibiting age discrimination has not been implemented efficiently in workforce. The ADEA somewhat has enabled Americans work longer, however, it might not be the best
According to Corley, Reed, Shedd, and Morehead, (2001) “the most important statue eliminating discriminatory employment practices, however, is the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act o 1972 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991.” The appropriation section o...
Introduction- Discrimination affects people all over the world. People of all ethnicities and from all different walks of life are influenced in some way by workplace discrimination. "Discrimination" means unequal treatment. One of the most common elements discriminated against is a persons ethnicity, or their race. This is called Racial Discrimination. While there are many federal laws concerning discrimination, most states have enacted laws that prohibit it. These laws may have different remedies than the federal laws and may, in certain circumstances be more favorable than the federal laws.
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.
Workplace harassment is unwelcome actions that are based on a person’s race, religion, color, and sex, and gender, country of origin, age, ethnicity or disability. The targets of the harassment are people who are usually perceived as “weaker” or “inferior” by the person who is harassing them. Companies and employers can also be guilty of workplace harassment if they utilize discriminatory practices against persons based on ethnicity, country of origin, religion, race, color, age, disability, or sex. These discriminatory practices have been illegal since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Civil Rights Act of 1964), and have been amended to be more inclusive of other people who experience discrimination by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (The Civil Rights Act of 1991), and most recently, President Obama’s signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (Stolberg, 2009).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1997, January). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Retrieved from: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html
Discrimination is not just a growing problem in the United States rather it is a global problem. However, throughout the years, there have been many laws that have been passed to give everyone their “separate but equal” rights—originally granted by the constitution of the United States. Examples of this include the Brown v. Board of Education case, the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (to list a few). Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark case that ended legal segregation in school systems. The success of this case was due largely in part to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This ruling not only paved the way for the integration of different race but also a victory for the Civil Rights Movement. On the other hand, the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a key piece of the civil rights legislation in the sense that it, “established the legal standard barring employers from excluding anyone from employment on the basis of race or ethnicity” (Sweet and Meiksins 184). Another example would be affirmative action. Affirmative action is a policy favoring those who have suffered from discrimination. One noticeable group is the minorities of the United States consisting of Asians, African Americans, Hispanic or Latino, and much more. Even though affirmative action allows
Age discrimination continues to be a problem for both men and women that are over the age of 40 in the workforce. In year 1967, the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act ADEA was passed to prohibit discrimination against workers over age 40 and older. Another law in the year 1964, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, or national origin. However there are still age discrimination and it seems to be more especially for older women more than older men. The Federal and the state should implement more regulations to protect workers' rights in all age groups, both in the younger and older generation including their race and gender.