Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

The addition of sexual orientation has gone before Congress many times but it has yet to be included as a protected class. There is so much controversy surrounding gay marriage right now that I believe it is only a matter of time before employment discrimination because of sexual orientation will be the reason for the Title VII will be amended once again. The most recent additions to this law have been discriminating based upon pregnancy, sex stereotyping, and sexual harassment. Title VII states that an employer can’t refuse to hire a woman based upon the fact that she is currently pregnant or because of any pregnancy-related conditions. To be safe and to avoid any litigation in the future, an employer should never ask an individual about their marital status or a woman if she is pregnant.

The last decade has produced an explosion of racial employment discrimination lawsuits. These lawsuits have resulted in record-breaking settlements. By federally mandating every business to review the history, impact and proposed policy of Article VII these lawsuits may subside. Reviewing Title VII is a step corporate America must soon make or continue to loose much needed revenue. Our team will discuss the history of Title VII, the impact of Title VII in the workplace, who is and who is not covered under Title VII as well as propose policies that companies should have in place to avoid Title VII violations.

Facts: This is a Title VII action alleging harassment based on national origin and religion. The facts are set forth in the light most favorable to Rafiq. On May 11, 2001, Mohommed Rafiq was hired as a car salesman. Rafiq was born in India and is a practicing Muslim. The alleged harassment began on September 11, 2001. When he arrived for work that afternoon, his co-workers were watching news coverage of the terrorist attacks and one of them asked him in a mocking way, "Where have you been?", as if to infer that he had participated in the attacks.

Federal (Title VII) and State legislation prohibit intentional discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and prohibit both “disparate treatment” and “disparate impact” discrimination.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that protects individuals from discrimination based on religion. Religious discrimination is treating a person differently because of their religious

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects people from being discriminated against due to who they are and what they look like this includes skin color, religious preference, where they come from and sex of the person. Title VII was amended to include the protection of pregnant women.

This act was setup to address discrimination of protected classes (e.g. African Americans, Asian, Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and women). The part of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that applies to employment decisions; mandates that employment decisions not be based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin (Gmoez-Mejia & Cardy, 2013).” Discrimination is about the making of distinctions; in the context of human resources, it is about the making of distinctions among people. There are two type of discrimination. Disparate treatment is when an employee is treated differently because of his protected status. Adverse impact is when the same standard is applied across the board; however it impacts a protected class more (Gmoez-Mejia & Cardy, 2013).In the case of #1-2013 adverse impact could apply to the shift changes that were implemented in January 2013. As the shift changes applied to all production employees. This could be construed as unintentional discrimination. However we haven’t had any other complaints to date.The company must reasonably accommodate religious beliefs or practices; unless it creates undue hardship (e.g. costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work). There are several ways

Although great strides in fighting gender discrimination were taken in the 1970s, largely due to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, abuses falling within the category of sexual harassment generally were not addressed. Finally, in 1980, the EEOC wrote and released guidelines that defined sexual harassment. They described it as one form of sex discrimination prohibited by the 1964 act. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 referred to as Title VII, prohibits employment discrimination and harassment based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin in addition to sexual harassment. The law specifically states;

Title VII applies to state and local governments with 15 or more employees and also applies to employment agencies and labor organizations including our federal government. Based on Title VII employment opportunities cannot be denied to any person based upon their race or perceived race or because of their marriage or association with a person or persons of a particular color or race. Title VII also prohibits employment decisions based on stereotypes and assumptions pertaining to the abilities, traits, or the performance of persons from certain racial groups. Title VII makes it unlawful to discriminate when recruiting, hiring, and promoting, transferring, also work assignments, performance measurements, the work environment, job training, discipline and discharge this also includes wages and benefits, and anything else including condition and the privilege of employment. Title VII not only prohibits intentional discrimination, it also covers neutral job policies that disproportionately affect any person of a certain race, color, nationality that are not related to the job and the needs of the

Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1946 that is an important legislation which plays a significant role in defining the employment procedures in today’s workplace. Racial discrimination will continue to be prohibited by Title VII and it has sparked an increase in anti-discrimination awareness as it is designed to promote equal opportunities, equality, and promote fairness. As a federal law, it is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a prospective employee from being hired based on gender, race, national origin and religion.

Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act forbids intentional discrimination based on several factors: religion, race, color, and sex or national origin. There are times, however, where discrimination can play a part in the decision-making process within businesses, especially within the public school system. The three-step procedures for Title VII challenges are very precise regarding the determination of intentional discrimination and are universal for all cases of alleged discrimination.

You have raised some great points as to J.C. encounter of unlawful religious discrimination. As you said J.C. tried to compromise with his employer by packing or wearing his dreads in a neat and professional matter. But as a result his employer refused which resulted in J.C. losing his job. I agree with your analysis that the company's actions toward J.C. is violation of Title VII. However I also believe that it is a violation of his first amendment right. As a citizen of this so called great land, we are allowed to practice our religion and face no form of discrimination. This case not only describes a violation against Title VII but also the first amendment

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it employment discrimination unlawful. This provision addresses employment practices such as compensation, training, hiring, termination, promotions and transfers. This law also protects employees from retaliation by their employers if they make an accusation of discrimination. Discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, color, and national origin is not permitted (Ivancevich & Konopaske, 2013). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 is an amendment to Title VII. It clarified disparate discrimination language and addressed the legal proceedings and award entitlements regarding discriminatory lawsuits. This law also broadened the scope of EEO to apply to additional situations and people (Ivancevich

Issue: Is an employer in violation of Title VII if they refuse to hire an applicant or discharge an employee based on a religious observance. Even when the applicant or employee fails to provide the employer, through explicit notification, of the applicant’s or employee’s need for a religious accommodation?

Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws-The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces all of these laws. EEOC also provides oversight and coordination of all federal equal employment opportunity regulations, practices, and policies (2009).