Case Analysis: Role of the EEOC

Facts: Gawley was a police officer who worked for Indiana University for several years. She sued the college because she noted sexual harassment by a higher-ranking officer than she was. She also sued because she felt she was part of a hostile work environment and that officers in her department retaliated against her for filing a complaint with the college. Her final argument was that there was spoliation of evidence. The district court found in favor of the employer. The case did not go to trial because the district court granted summary judgment. Summary judgment is used to avoid trials. The decision was made based on two key decisions made by the Supreme Court in other cases and that the university was able to establish an affirmative defense. The university “may assert an affirmative defense that examines the reasonableness of the employer’s and the target’s conduct” (Kaplin & Lee, 2014, p. 167). Gawley then appealed to the United State Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. This case brief will outline the question, holding, reasoning, and significance of this case as it was decided by the United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

STATEMENT OF FACTS: Sheila White interviewed with Marvin Brown and obtained a job as a “track laborer” with Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company. Shortly after her hire date, however, she assumed forklift operator duties. This new assignment still fell under the “track laborer” position description, and White occasionally performed those duties although her primary responsibility was operating the forklift. Three months into her new job, White complained to the company that her immediate supervisor was sexually harassing her on the job. He was temporarily suspended and required to attend sexual harassment training. White was then informed that she was being reassigned to track labor duties only. White

Workplace discrimination takes place when an employee is hostilely discriminated against for one or more reasons, including gender, religion, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity or race. Per the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, racial discrimination comprises of treating a job candidate or employee negatively because they are of a certain ethnicity or because of particular features linked with their race, such as hair texture, facial features or skin color. While the law forbids workplace harassment and discrimination in all facets of employment, from hiring and training to raises and layoffs, the EEOC still reports thousands of claims a year. One such claim was filed by the EEOC in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota against Alliant Techsystems (ATK), on behalf of Tyeastia Green.

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 court should take a look at what the partners said like, “she was sometimes overly aggressive” (Nkomo, Fottler, McAfee, 7 edition, p. 57). The judge should rule in favor of Thelma Jones because she is being sexually discriminated. The employer did in fact discriminate unlawfully because you’re not allowed to tell a woman to be more “femininely” just to get a higher position.

Dr. Marianne Bertrand, an economics professor, testified that some corporate recruiters can identify a person’s race based on his or her name. Bertrand’s study compared job applicants with Caucasian names, such as Sarah, versus applicants with African-American names such as Lakisha.

This case is about a group of women who were discriminated against based on their gender. The lawsuit was put into the hands of the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) after a group of Latino women that worked for Rivera Vineyard, Inc. reported multiple complaints. Those involved included Rivera Vineyards Company employees that consist of Latino female workers, male workers, and male managers. Most of the Latino farm workers suffering victimization were females, there were also some males. These males were targeted because of their attempt to speak up on behalf of the harassed females.

This lawsuit unfortunately, gives HR and recruiting a bad name. After reading the article I have to admit that I was both appalled, alarmed; however, I wasn’t shocked, though. Unfortunately, discrimination is too common.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sues the fast food restaurant checkers because of the discrimination that was occurring to their employees. The discrimination in the workplace that alters the amount of pay or the number of hours a woman is given compare to male working is breaking the

A. Plaintiff, Beth Ann Faragher, has brought action to her employer, City of Boca Raton- Bill Terry and David Silverman. Plaintiff claims that she was sexually harassed by her immediate supervisors during her employment, which was a violation of Title VII and other state and federal laws. Plaintiff also claims that the sexual harassment she endured by the defendants created a sexually hostile environment. Plaintiff is also suing Terry for battery and the City for negligent retention and supervision of Terry

In today’s world, the American still has barriers to overcome in the matter of racial equality. Whether it is being passed over for a promotion at the job or being underpaid, some people have to deal with unfair practice that would prevent someone of color or the opposite sex from having equal opportunity at the job. In 2004, Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores Incorporation was a civil rights class-action suite that ruled in favor of the women who worked and did not received promotions, pay and certain job assignments. This proves that some corporations ignore the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which protects workers from discrimination based on sex, race, religion or national origin.

Facts of the case: Imagine you are an HR manager and your boss and owner of the company, Bill, comes to you suspecting his assistant, Paige, is stealing money from the company. Bill would like a polygraph test conducted to see if Paige is stealing from the company. He would also like you to conduct electronic surveillance on Paige’s work e-mail for anything suspicious.

This paper will outline a complaint process and illustrate the civil litigation that could follow if the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, through mediation and arbitration cannot resolve a charge. The complaint is based on a scenario of an employee, named John. John works for a private sector business and he wishes to lodge a complaint of discrimination against the company he works for. This paper will explain the steps that are taken, from the beginning with the (EEOC), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The paper will continue explaining the process by illustrating the civil litigation steps from the state level to the highest level of the United States Supreme Courts.

Lisa Baxter has been encountering sexual harassment issues in the business and she thought she was the only one, until she found out that also other women in the organization are getting sexually harassed and so she decides to speak up