Aunt Ella's Pie Company Case Study

Over the last several decades, workplace issues have become an area of controversy for most employers. This is because the regulations surrounding what practices are considered to be discriminatory have increased dramatically. To enforce these issues, the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) is playing a central role in making employers follow these provisions of the law. A recent example of this occurred, with the case EEOC v. HCS Medical Staffing Inc.

Kalamazoo County Road Commission (2015), the plaintiff Terry Tilly alleged that the Kalamazoo County Road Commission violated his right to take medical leave provided by the Family and Medical Leave Act. The KCRC’s personnel manual, which definitively advises that the manual serves “a basic guide to basic benefits, working conditions and policies” in part states that, “Employees covered under the Family and Medical Leave Act are full-time employees who have worked for the Road Commission and accumulated 1,250 work hours in the previous 12 months.” There are several statutes that specify a minimum employer size in term of the number of employees in the roster (Walsh, 2013, p. 10). Under section 2611 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, an employee who works for a company that does not meet the FMLA 50/75-Employee Threshold is not eligible for FMLA (2010). The trial court, therefore, ruled in favor of the Kalamazoo County Road Commission, dismissing Mr. Tilley’s FMLA claim. However, the Court of Appeals would later overturn the dismissal of the case. Although the employer did not meet the FMLA 50/75-Employee Threshold, making Mr. Tilley an ineligible employee under the FMLA, the company’s employee handbook misrepresented his eligibility to apply for FMLA benefits. The manual failed to mention the FMLA 50/75-Employee Threshold, so Mr. Tilley was in fact protected under the FMLA

The purpose of this paper is to go over a lawsuit that was filled by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The paper will cover who the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) is and their role in the lawsuit. It will go over whether or not the lawsuit promotes social change. The paper will also go over how the EEOC as well as other news groups released information about the case to the public. I will then give my take on how I would implement new strategies to make sure the problem does not come up in the workplace again.

The United States Supreme Court, as well as federal district and state courts, defines employee rights and an employer’s liability for employment law violations. Treatment on the job, including hiring, firing, and promotions, must be based on qualifications and merit and not on race, gender, age, sexual preference or how one responds to sexual advances. Yet despite these laws and policies, many employees continue to suffer from workplace harassment and employment discrimination.

Companies that discriminate on basis of a host of job-irrelevant issues, comprising race, sexual orientation, gender, disability, age and ethnicity put themselves at a competitive disadvantage as opposed to companies that appraise employees solely on their credentials and qualifications to work well. Given the high rates of discrimination encountering the workforce today, discrimination based on racial discrimination and sexual orientation represents an actual hazard to the profitability of companies (Oeo.tufts.edu, 2015). This essay discusses the non-discrimination policy of the Home depot company.

The legal process within the human resources department tries to format strategies and alliances that avoid negative activities affecting the employers and employees; however, exhibitions using common sense or compassion can conflict with these guidelines creating inappropriate behaviors. If this becomes the case, disciplinary actions begin bringing about other matters of legal issues. Nevertheless, once an individual believes they have been illegally mistreated, they become more apt to submit a lawsuit for purposes of revenge, financial struggles, or inapt employment securities (Alboher, 2012).

4. Veronica is a waitress at Didi’s Diner. She is paid $2.13 per hour, and she is entitled to keep all of her tips, which average $8.50 per hour. Is Didi’s in compliance with the FLSA?

The act created the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) within the Department of Labor to enforce the act. The FLSA established a federal minimum wage of $0.25 an hour. The FLSA also requires that employees receive one and a half times their hourly wage for every hour worked beyond a standard workweek. The FLSA applies to employers whose annual sales are greater than $500,000 or engage in interstate commerce. If the employer does not meet the $500,000 threshold, the employee may still be covered by the FLSA if they engaged in interstate commerce. The FLSA allows for certain employees to be paid a subminimum wage. For example, tipped employees may be paid less than the basic minimum wage, but their cash wage plus tips must at least equal the basic minimum wage. Other types of employees who may be paid a subminimum wage include: certain disabled workers, new hires under the age of 20, and student learners (Minimum Wage Overview: Provisions Of The Fair Labor Standards Act. (Cover story), 2013). Employees whose jobs are governed by the FLSA are classified as either “exempt” or “nonexempt”. Employees who are exempt are not entitled to overtime pay. To be classified as exempt, employees must earn a minimum of $455 per week and meet certain duties tests for their job type. Executive, Administrative, and Professional employees are exempt provided their jobs meet the standards. Outside salespersons and

Imagine that you are the HR Director at your current organization or an organization with which you are familiar. As the HR Director, you must use different employment law requirements to create methods and policies that support the promotion of a diverse workforce. Select one (1) job opportunity that you have held or with which you are familiar within the same organization for this scenario.

Tipping has emerged as a major method of compensating wait staff ever since the 1960s when Congress passed the provision within Fair Labor Standards Act legislation which introduced the “tip credit” (Allegretto & Cooper, July 10, 2014). The FLSA provision set the minimum wage for tipped employees at $2.13 per hour, given that the employees would ‘earn’ $7.25 per hour from tips. The government considers employees who earn more than $30 per month as tipped employees. The tipped minimum wage has adversely impacted tipped employees, which includes barbers, stylists, wait staff, doormen, etc., such that they need to provide a high level of service so they can receive generous tips. The tipped minimum wage provision assigns tipped employees to high poverty due to their low income salary levels.

The EEOC laws, or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, are federal laws that enforce employers to not discriminate against applicants of any background. Discrimination by types such as age, disability, equal pay/compensation, genetic information, harassment, national origin, pregnancy, race/color, religion, retaliation, sex, and sexual harassment are all protected under the EEOC laws. It is also illegal for an employer to “discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.” (EEOC , n.d.) The EEOC laws are to help serve justice and to create an equal work environment for people of any kind. The EEOC wants to accomplish the goal of having every applicant to feel at home without being discriminated against. These laws not only affect an employer hiring an applicant however; it affects them in firing, promoting, harassing, training, wages, and benefits. The EEOC’s role is to help find out if any applicant is being discriminated against and to help

The individual therefore only receives pay for the working hours for which they are required: hours which may be subject to variation on a daily or weekly basis.

Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) laws have helped shape the workforce today and they have greatly contributed to the introduction of diversity in the working environment. No longer are people rejected of employment based on their race, gender, age, or disability. The labor force has increased from 62 million people in 1950 to over 159 million people in the labor force today (Toolsi). The passing of the EEO laws proved to be a great advancement in the diversity of the workforce and treatment of employees, but it was a tremendous battle to get where we are today. Before the passing of these laws, unequal treatment was normal and discrimination was common among the majority of employers. This made acquiring employment difficult and caused many people to be unemployed. Three Equal Employment Opportunity laws that helped diminish these discriminatory practices were Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and the American with Disabilities Act of 1990. For each law, I will describe what it enforces and explain the actions that happened in society and the workplace that made these laws necessary. I will discuss important political figures that contributed to the passing of these laws. Lastly, I will examine how each law has improved human resources and has led to better management of employees overall.

While equal rights and equal pay legislation made it illegal to discriminate “based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin“ (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2011b, p. 1), the number of workplace discrimination cases continue to rise and is costing employers more than $319 million in 2010, not counting litigation (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2011a). Many employers have extensive human resource organizations with a sophisticated grasp on the implications of equal rights legislation on employers, that employ professionals, like I/O psychologists and attorneys, to establish fair policies and employment practices, and decrease an employer’s risk of litigation (Aamodt, 2010). In fact, employers often perform statistical analysis of employment practices to understand whether the practice could have an adverse impact against members of a protected class. For example, testing is a practice employers use for employee selection in the hiring process; even when an employment test is determined to be reliable, valid, and cost-efficient, care is taken to assure testing predicts performance equally well for all applications (Aamodt, 2010). Because governments and corporations have a fiduciary duty to citizens and shareholders, employers should continue to care about the issue of adverse impact, but more importantly, both government and corporations have a civil responsibility to treat the members of society fairly, because societal

The American employment laws are designed to foster human dignity and in the process provide employees with various tangible benefits. It is therefore expected for employees to be on the forefront in supporting and adhering to them. Likewise if an organization applies effectively these laws, it can benefit massively from dynamic, healthy, motivated, and productive employees. It therefore goes without saying that managers, just like employees, should promote these laws and thus ensures the organization conforms to them. Generally these laws govern the workplace actions of employers and employees. It ensures a fruitful and legally conducive environment and relationship exists between these two parties, and within employees