EQUAL OPPORTUNITY: MAJOR HR LAWS AFFECTING EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 6
EqualOpportunity: Major HR Laws Affecting Equal Opportunity
Sometimes,employees do not receive maximum considerations when seekingemployment opportunities, or even when working. This is because theemployers fail to apply equal opportunity laws. Equal opportunityemployment laws are critical since they help in ensuring that allemployees get equal opportunities in employment. Besides, theapplication of equal employment laws is critical since it helpsemployers in eliminating court cases, where employees can sueemployers on basis of employment discrimination. Employees may bediscriminated on the ground of religion, national of origin, sex oreven education. Thus, in order to avoid these discriminations inemployment, employers should consider using equal opportunityemployment laws. In this assignment, different scenarios will beconsidered in establishing the equal opportunity law being violated.Further, the actions that should be considered by the HR will bediscussed, which will be based on the law violated.
Employeesshould be granted the opportunity to exercise their religiouspractices without discrimination, when serving employment. This is inaccordance to the Title VII of the Civil rights Act of 1964, whichprovides that employers should not discriminate against employees dueto their religious practices in hiring, firing and other situationsof employment. Besides, Title VII requires employers to accommodatereasonably the religious practices of the employee or ay prospectiveemployee, unless if doing so would develop an undue hardship on theside of the employer. In this scenario, Roderick would not be in aposition to work on Friday afternoons after 2 PM and would not becapable of reporting to work before noon on Mondays due to hisreligious practices. He should be granted the permission to attend tohis religious practices in case the practices do not cause unduehardship on the employer. In case permission is not granted, theTitle VII provision will be violated (Daft,2010).
Asan HR manager, the religious practices of the employee should beconsidered in allocating duty to the employee. The organization hasthree shifts per day, which implies that it is possible to putRoderick in two shifts on the other days so as to recover the timethat he is not present. Since the employee is willing to extend hisworkdays on other afternoons, when he is not attending religiouspractices, it is feasible to reschedule work to the employee on otherdays. However, this must not affect the operations of the facility.
Inthis case, the employee is being discriminated due to his skin color.This is because other workers are treated well by having an averageof five hours of overtime because they are Whites however, since heis an African American, he does not receive the same privilege.Besides, he is harassed through being given names that demean him.This is a violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.According to Title VII, unequal treatment and harassment on theground of race in all areas of employment are prohibited (TheBalser Group,2013).
Asan HR manager, I would consider making all the employees to have anaverage of equal hours of overtime. Therefore, I would first allocatemore overtime hours to Adam in order to be at par with otheremployees. Then, due to the harassment received from the coworkers, Iwould put up a harassment policy that would provide the appropriatemeasures to be taken in case one employee harasses another. Besides,I would sue the supervisors that harass Adam on the basis of his raceon his behalf so that this can act as a lesson to other employees,who think of harassing others.
Inthis case, the Tampa supervisor has violated the Executive Order11246 of the Federal Contract Compliance Programs, which imposesaffirmative action regulations (Daft,2010). The supervisor had ruled out the inclusion of females and oldindividuals in the contract. As the HR manager, I would revoke thecontract placed by the supervisor and put an appropriateadvertisement that is open to all.
Inthis case, one of the hiring managers does not prefer a candidate onthe ground that the candidate’s personal information indicates thathe comes from Mexico. This is discrimination based on place oforigin. This is a violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,which restricts any form of discrimination during the hiring processon the ground of the place of origin (Daft,2010). In fact, the hiring manager knowingly understands what he isdoing is not legal. As the HR manager, I would consider informing theexecutive on the conduct of the manager in order for the executive totake the necessary steps.
Inthis case, the supervisor of Tiffany is very right for requiringTiffany to carry out light duty jobs in the production line this isbecause of her condition. However, the argument that she is noteligible for the incentive program is not true Tiffany should betreated like any other worker. This is a violation of the PregnancyDiscrimination Act, which advocates for non-discrimination on thebasis of pregnancy (TheBalser Group,2013). Tiffany is entitled to receive her incentive pay as usual andshould not be considered as a loss on the side of the employer. As anHR manager, I would consider putting Tiffany back to the incentiveprogram.
Inthis case, the VP of finance does not want to consider Jenniferbecause she has a disability that he sees might influence her workingand performance. It is not right to discriminate a person on thebasis of his/her physical disability. By not considering Jennifer forthe position due to her condition is a violation of the Americanswith Disabilities Act Title I, which restricts employers fromdiscriminating against qualified individuals having a disability(Bogardus,2004). In this situation Jennifer is qualified for the position, buther disability makes the VC of finance not consider her. As an HRmanager, I would consider resolving the matter with the VC of financein regard to the provision of this Act in order to make him considerher for the position.
Bogardus,A. M. (2004). Humanresources jumpstart.San Francisco: SYBEX.
Daft,R. L. (2010). Management.Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.
TheBalser Group. (2013). MandatedBenefits: 2014 Compliance Guide.Wolters Kluwer Law and Business.