Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction papers about age discrimination
Age Discrimination in the work place(Globally)
Case study of age discrimination act 2006
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Introduction papers about age discrimination
In today’s modern business environment, human resources (HR) plays a critical role in keeping executives informed of key legislation and minimizing the organization’s risk exposure. Expectations are high and HR responsibilities are broad, including recruitment, retention, performance management, risk management, training and education, and employee safety, wellness, and benefits. When it comes to employment regulations and ever-changing legislation, executives rely heavily on HR professionals to be subject matter experts. Age discrimination suits are on the rise and post-termination lawsuits can be a real threat to an organization. The Supreme Court’s (SC) ruling on McKennon versus Nashville Banner Publishing Company (NBPC) increased an …show more content…
The decision determined that even though after-acquired evidence is admissible, it should not leave the plaintiff with no opportunity for relief and that company’s must be held responsible for discrimination (O’Brien, 1996). The decision was particularly significant because it linked the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act …show more content…
HR professionals must stay up to date on legislation changes. For example, the ADEA originally set an age range from 40 through 65, then extended the range to 70, and ultimately lifted the upper age limit in 1986, thus essentially banning mandatory retirement (Carden & Boyd, 2014). A recent example of new legislation that has enhanced opportunities for employees to sue their former employers after termination or layoff includes the Genetic Information Nondisclosure Act (GINA), which makes it illegal to discriminate using genetic health information (Padalino, 2012). In addition, a 2009 change to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) broadened the qualifiers, increasing employer vulnerability to such discrimination claims (Padalino, 2012). HR professionals must not only be aware of legislation changes and SC rulings, but they must ensure the adequate education and training of executives and management to ensure legal compliance across the
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 "2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals" held that those business practices that have had a disparate impact effect on the older workers are now considered to be actionable under one national anti-discrimination law (Hamblett, 2004). The case does reaffirm a second Circuit precedent that had been set but which is at odds with what a majority of federal courts have held. The appeals court supported the idea that a layoff plan had been properly brought under the The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) although the company did not have the intention of discriminating.
Does the evidence indicate that Mr. Zimpfer was a victim of age discrimination according to ADEA? Why or why not?
Facts: In the above case, employee Joel Hernandez was tested positive for cocaine. With the fear of being dismissed from his job, he acknowledged that his behaviour violated petitioner Raytheon Company's workplace conduct rules, and obviously, was pressed to quit his job. Also, the reason for the employee resignation was also based on the notion that had he not resigned it would be petitioner who would eventually fired him from his work. After more than two years of rehabilitation, petitioner applied to be re-employed alleging on his application that the following had previously hired him. In his application, he also attached letters coming from, his pastor about his active church participation and from an Alcoholics Anonymous counsellor about his regular visit and attendance at meetings and his immediate recovery. When a HR employee of petitioner reviewed Hernandez application, she then rejected his application on the ground that petitioner has a policy against rehiring employees who are terminated for workplace wrongdoing. According to the HR employee, she did not know that that employee was a former drug addict when she rejected his application. As a result to this development, Hernandez instituted a suit and filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), averring that his rights has been violated in consonant with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). Therefore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) as a consequence, gave a go signal to the respondent and issued a right-to-sue letter and the right to file an ADA action. Following this, respondent established an Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) action, alleging that petitioner did not act on his application for the reason that he has a record of drug addition and/or because he was known before as being a drug user. On the other hand, petitioner responded by filing a summary judgement motion. This resulted to respondent's argumentation in the alternative that in the case that petitioner sought for a neutral no-rehire policy in his case, it is still sufficient to a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) because of that policy's disparate impact.
...lley, W. H., Jennings, K. M., Wolters, R. S., & Mathis, R. L. (2012). Employment & Labor Relations. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
The Jaffee-Redmond ruling heavily impacted how all organizations and firms deal with staff members’ rights. Today, the legal human resource environment requires that all key organizational professionals know and understand the laws affected by this case. Prospective job candidates who are well-versed in these laws and similar issues can outmaneuver less knowledgeable candidates. Training in current privacy laws are a valuable asset in several settings, such as:
It held that in order to make a claim based on disparate impact, the plaintiff needs only to prove that the need for accommodation was the motive behind the employer’s refusal to hire them, not whether the employer knew about this need. Therefore, the Court determined that rather than imposing a knowledge standard, like the 10th Circuit Court did, motive was enough to violate Title VII since Abercrombie knew or suspected that Elauf wore the headscarf for religious reasons and did not want to accommodate her.
Bennett-Alexander, Dawn D. & Hartman, Laura P. (2001). Employment Law for Business (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Primis Custom Publishing. Downloaded February 4, 2008 from the data base of http://www.eeoc.gov
Stossel and Mastropolo’s thesis did not come until at the middle of the article when they talked about how Murray Schwartz is convinced “that older people can do the job just as well as younger people and believes that employment age discrimination laws are a crucial protection for older workers” (paragraph 11). With this issue, there are two sides of argument in this article: one is from the corporate as to why it is a necessity to fire people when they come of age, and the second one is from the workers being affected at this age discrimination. There are several people applying for jobs these days and a company attempts to fill that job with the best qualified person. If a per...
In an effort to gain a working understanding of the Human Resources field, I chose to interview the Director of Human Resources for an organization in Miami, Florida. What I learned goes far beyond any classroom or textbook instruction. It is clear; the field of Human Resources will never be static, as society, technology, and legal environments change, so will the field of Human Resources.
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.
Our rapidly changing technological society has dramatically transformed the workplace, as regulations, procedures, rules, and policies strictly control organizations today. Managers and supervisors are a fundamental part of the human resource team that oversees and guarantee human resource policies and decisions are being adhered to on a day-to-day basis, to not only safeguard the company, but also ensure the employee’s rights. In addition, Human Resource Management attends to employees “labor relations, health and safety, and fairness concerns” (Dessler, 2015, p. 4). Consequently, progression to control employees without discrimination has increased, as well as the number of new complex state and federal laws, both affecting legal issues
In the case of David Nelson vs Radioshack, a 55 year old tenured employee was given a 43 year old supervisor and inspite his outstanding performance record was placed on two improvement plans. (EEOC, 2010) David felt he was being discriminated and complained to his HR department. He was fired 5 days later. This work environment is not acceptable. This individual worked for the organization for 25 years and was nearing retirement. Unethical issues like this one will not be tolerated within the organization. I will ensure that individuals who are feeling discrimination are not retaliated upon for expressing concern. Managers and supervisors will be also be reviewd to determine if they hold onto BIAses and Equal opportunity traiing sessions will be mandatory for all
Amack, L. O. The future of employment discrimination law. Law Info Forum, Available at: http://www.google.com, March 6, 1994, 1-4.
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.