Title Vii of the Civil Rights Act

Week 2 Cases/Exercises

a. Case 14 (pg. 46)

1. The factors that appear to be affecting LGA Industries’ staffing practices is limited workers available due to the company being located in a small town, and most of the staff being immigrant workers and did not have the appropriate documents to work. The employment application process was not handled properly, and the company did not keep I-9 forms for its workers.

2. It is the employers’ responsibility to maintain adequate records to ensure that all workers are eligible to work in the United States. If the verification process is not completed within three days of hire; it is a violation for the company with the Department of Labor.

3. At this point, Martin should terminate the service of the agency, and research other agencies to handle the company. The existing employees would remain with the company, but I would try to advertise the companies’ positions and provide that group with proper training. Additionally, I would work with the existing employees to make sure they have all the appropriate work documentation going forward.

b. Exercise 17 (pg. 56)

1. The legal statutes that apply in this case are the Violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (discrimination based on religion) and wrongful termination. The court must decide if Elaine Mobley was wrongfully terminated due to religious discrimination. As the appointed Judge, I must review all the elements to this case. The plaintiff in this case states that she was terminated to religious discrimination. In this case, whistleblowing is a more public term in today's world. A common trend for employers is to fire the employee if they claim discrimination. If individuals report discrimination, it should not be rewarded or punished it should be handled appropriately. Her poor attendance started when her co-workers started teasing her about her religious beliefs which caused her to work in a hostile work environment. I am agreeing with the Plaintiff, the Virginia Health Department did discriminate against this employee by terminating her after she reported the problem. The company failed to apply reasonable accommodations for this employee.

2. The legal statue in this case is the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. The court must decide whether or not Edward Roberts was discriminated against by not being offered a position because of his race. As the judge, I would side with the plaintiff in this case. It appears that the employer did not review the applications for Mr. Roberts. There had only been three months from the time period of the applications to June when Mr. Edwards learned that everyone that was hired was white. This is clearly a case of discrimination based on race.

3. The legal statue that applies in this case is the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court must decide if Thelma Jones was withheld a promotion due to discrimination based on sex. If I were judge, I would rule in favor of the plaintiff. Employers have the right to enforce a dress code based on position and specific job requirements. However, they cannot inform an employee that they did not receive a promotion based on their appearance.

4. The legal statutes that apply in this case are the Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964 as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act. The issues are related to asking male to obey the dress code as a male. As the judge, the employer did not discriminate on this employee based on sex because they have a standard dress code based on gender. However, they did discriminate against this employee under the Americans with Disabilities Act due to his upcoming surgery.

5. The legal statute that apply in this case is the Violation of the Civil Rights Act 1991. The court must decide if his civil rights were violated based on his race, and if the company acted in retaliation of his claims. I would rule in favor of Andre Johnson. He was in a hostile work environment due to name calling from his supervisor Also, he complained to his upper management and his co-workers as well as his supervisor acted in retaliation. While out sick, someone submitted a false resignation to his supervisor and he was terminated from his position.

6. The legal statue that applies in this case is the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court must decide if Paul Martin was discriminated against when he did not receive a promotion. As judge, I would rule in favor of the Department of Transportation. There was not sufficient evidence to show that the company violated any laws pertaining to their selection for a promotion. The company was actually using their affirmation action guides during the process.

7. The legal statue that applies in this case is the Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court must decide whether or not Ms. Elnora Williams Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 rights was violated by being discriminated