There are times when we think that we know the laws of the land, but do we really know them. I asked several people about their rights as a citizen. I was surprised that many individuals did not know their rights on jobs, are in the general public. When I was coming up in school, they taught us civics. It is a shame that many people do not know anything about civics. I asked another person did they know what civics was. The reply was, that they believe it was something that dealt with an alien take over of the world. I could not do nothing but laugh. Whatever alien that has taken over the world is from the planet ignoramus. Whatever happened, it erased knowledge of the past and is now on course of a scary future.
Government and most states’ laws prohibit workplace race bigotry. In fact, Title VII — the federal law that forbids race discrimination — has recently been on the books for almost five decades now. However, apparently, some business employers have not gotten the message, because racial discrimination still happens more often than anyone wants to believe. Inside fact, it is the most common type of discrimination employees are accountable to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the federal agency that enforces Title VII.
Discrimination pays a very high price, both from the victims and from the companies that let it occur. Legal cases in recent times have proven this point, as large companies have experienced to pay for a huge amount to compensate the sufferers of competition discrimination and also to pay for their complicity in motivating or allowing a discriminatory atmosphere to prosper in the work environment.
An employer does race discrimination when it makes job judgments by nationality or when it retreats into seemingly unbiased job guidelines that disproportionately affect members of a particular contest.
Federal and most states’ laws and regulations prohibit race elegance in every aspect of employment, including employing, firing, promotions, compensation, job training, discipline, and termination.
Whenever an employer deliberately public out candidates or employees of a particular race for less favorable treatment, that is “disparate treatment” discrimination. However, the burden falls more heavily on employees of a particular race, that is “disparate impact” discrimination.
An employee who makes a disparate treatment claim alleges that he or she was handled differently than other employees who were in similar situations, due to employee’s competition. For example, a boss promotes only white employees to remedies positions, requires only job seekers of a certain race to submit to drug tests, or refuses to allow employees of certain races to deal with customers.
An employer that discriminates by physical characteristics associated with a particular race — such as hair texture or color, skin color, or facial features — also commits disparate treatment discrimination.
In a disparate impact legal action, the employee does not state that the employer purposely singled out employees of a particular race for bad treatment. Instead, the employee claims that the employer’s apparently neutral policy, rule, or practice has a disproportionately negative effect on users of a particular competition.
For example, a work policy requiring men to be clean-shaven may discriminate against African-American men, who are more likely to experience Pseudofolliculitis barbae (a painful skin condition triggered and exacerbated by shaving). A minimum height need may screen out excessive numbers of Asian Us and Latino job candidates. Analysis on hiring any applicant with an arrest or conviction record could disproportionately affect Latino and Black men.
If an employee implies that a particular policy has a disproportionate impact on members of the particular race, the employer can defend the plan by showing that there is a legitimate, important, job-related reason that necessitates the policy. For example, a height requirement might be justified if the employer can present that an employee must be at least a certain level to operate a particular type of machinery. However, an employer would be hard-pressed to justify a level requirement for a office position.
Harassment is also restricted. Harassment is any behavior based on a person’s actions that create an overwhelming, hostile, or offensive work environment or interferes with the individual’s works performance. Harassing might include racial slurs, jokes in regards to a particular ethnic group, physical acts of significance to a certain racial group.
Not every joke or inappropriate remark could be harassment, from a legal perspective. Place of work conduct must be unwelcome. Also it must be adequately severe or pervasive to change the conditions and conditions of the victim’s employment, to qualify as harassment. If the conduct is extreme, an individual incident might be enough to create a hostile environment. Physical assault, use of “the N-word, ” or hanging a noose, for example, might be so threatening and insulting as to be a nuisance. In the event the comments or functions are much less offensive, they will constitute harassment if they often happen enough to change the workplace surroundings.
What Is Race Discrimination? | Nolo.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fighting-race-national-origin-discriminat
One thought on “If Laws Are Set in Stone to Prevent Discrimination, Why Is Discrimination A Problem?”