Job Discrimination

Job discrimination has been a poison polluting the atmosphere of the workforce for a countless number of decades. Unfortunately, it is a poison that still lingers in today’s modern workforce. To combat this threat, and to aid those individuals affected, several Federal laws have been implemented to prohibit job discrimination. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, as an example, is a Federal legislation that outlawed unequal opportunities and rights in the workplace. The purpose of this legislation is to prohibit employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin ("Federal laws prohibiting," 2009). However, is it a justified action for a business to hire staff based solely on the fact that they are Christian? After all, Federal law prohibits employment discrimination based not only on color, race, sex, or national origin, but also based on religion. How should an employer respond that is proposing for their hiring policy to target dedicated Christians only?

As a case study, let’s review the story of Matthew, an entrepreneur that is planning to open a manufacturing facility. He is considering a “Christian-only” hiring policy whereby he would determine to hire only professing, evangelical Christians to work in the facility. As a Christian, how should you advise Matthew on how to pursue his potential hiring options? Would such a policy be legal? If so, under what terms and what might the restrictions be? From a Great Commission perspective, would this policy be advisable?

Perhaps the intent of hiring professing, evangelical Christians to work in the facility may not be only to create a peaceful and religious work environment, but it can also be instrumental in weeding out the so-called “bad apples” that ...

... middle of paper ...

...of the world ("Great Commission," ). If Matthew is starting-up a manufacturing facility, what religious teachings would be intended to be spread to the masses? A church or religious organization would certainly be categorized as following the Great Commission, whereas a manufacturing facility would not.

Ultimately, Matthew’s business idea would not be honored by the code of Federal law. Furthermore, the decision to pursue the opportunity should be discouraged and not advised due to the ramifications that can occur as a result of the business. Therefore, the decision should be made to either (1) present another business concept that falls within the Federal exceptions, (2) plan for the manufacturing facility to produce products that are of religious nature, or (3) abandon the idea altogether; the legal consequences would far exceed those of the business desires.