Case study analysis In 2001 Enriquez had to decide whether or not he wanted to retain his job as a medical director in West Jersey or proceed with a procedure to transform from male to female. Enriquez decided in order to overcome his identify disorder, he had to transition; because of his decision, Enriquez received negative feedback from his co-workers because he proceeded with the transformation to make himself become the person he longed to be. As a female Enriquez was under even more scrutiny and was eventually terminated as a director. Enriquez realized she was discriminated against and this case would fall under the New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD).
Personal observation Based on my observation of this case study, Enriquez was not only discriminated against but also bullied because of an identify disorder. Enriquez was hired to be a director of a hospital based on qualifications, and prior job history. It is unfortunate she was criticized for a disorder she suffered from as a male. Her co-workers should have taken the time to understand what she was going through instead of passing judgement.
Legal aspects
As mentioned above Enriquez could file a discrimination case under LAD. Melvin & Katz (2015) states:
The court reasoned since the “LAD” makes it unlawful to discriminate against someone based upon sex and affectional or sexual orientation, individuals who were transsexual or affected by a gender identify disorder were also considered to
However, in this case, Saundra Davis wasn’t the only conflict of interest Vance had issues with; Vance had a second altercation with another co-worker named Connie McVicker. For her part, McVicker called Vance a “porch money” and used the term “nigger” to refer to both her and other African-American students. Vance was informed co-worker McVicker family has connections to the Ku Klux Klan. Vance was frightened, she claimed both co-workers used racial slur towards her in the workplace. When Vance reported the harassment to the University’s Compliance Office, Kimes investigated the complaints. During the process, Kimes was very rude and a little prejudice; he refused to shake Vance’s hand. After the investigation was completed Davis walked away freely, Kimes exhorted both Davis and Vance to “respect” each other in the workplace. Co-workers witnessed Davis daughter accosted Vance on campus, making racist threaten statements. The co-workers who witnessed the complaints should have come forward, but instead, they keep quite. Vance complained to the EEOC and filed harassment charges proclaimed Davis violated her civil rights and denied her breaks, in response to the investigations no sign of
S: YMR stated that she had been living with her mother about one year, has is a newcomer. YMR lived with her maternal grandmother for many years back in her country. YMR stated that when she arrived to the U.S., she found out that her mother was pregnant, She shared that her mother did not want to tell her because she did not know how the client was going to react. YMR stated that she was happy because her mother had had four miscarries before. YMR explained that almost at the same time that she started living with her mother, the mother's partner and father of the child that her mother was going to have moved into her home. YMR stated that her mom used to work from 6am-12pm and the YMR spent a lot of time with her mother's partner. YMR stated that this man has
I presented Esteban’s case during case consultation because I noticed that I had countertransference when doing his intake. My expectation when presenting this case was to receive feedback that would help me to provide effective treatment to Esteban without my countertransference affecting his treatment. This section of the paper will talk about the feedback I received about my countertransference and how to support Esteban.
In James McFadden vs. Airline company, James, a transsexual person, told his employer that he would be dressing as a woman in preparation to his “surgical sex reassignment”. James was fired from his job because he refused to dress and act as a man. In this case the legal statute that could apply would be the sex discrimination against James. The court should look at what happen, James told his employer about the sex change and employer told him he had to keep dressing as a man, he refused and was fired. The judge should rule in favor of the Airline Company because the employer told James he couldn’t do that, and it is understandable because of airport security. He was also no discriminated because he was still a man, and he said he was treated differently from the other women employed.
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.
to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his [or her] compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin…”(EEOC, n.d.).
Marcus Ashmore and Terrell Lee Green were maintenance workers for J.P. Thayer Co., Inc. under supervisor Gene Fye. After a particular incident of harassment on January 16, 2001, Plaintiffs reported Fye to Tricia Johnson, the Assistant Property Manager. At this time, Johnson did nothing about the complaint. The harassment continued, and on January 26, Plaintiffs complained to the Property Manager, Mary Frances de Rivera. In response, de Rivera verbally reprimanded Fye. This, however, did not stop Fye’s harassment. Instead of reporting the behavior to Defendant, Plaintiffs hired an attorney who wrote a letter to Defendant saying that Ashmore and Green were going to file charges of discrimination with the EEOC. On February 22, Fye was fired by Defendant. This came three days after getting the letter and about a month after the initial harassment complaints.
She worked as a reference librarian at Mississippi College School of law and later begin law practicing. Ice has knowledge of work labor laws in Mississippi that can clarify concerns for workers they may have. A worker asked Ice, "Last week I was fired from my job for no apparent reason. Is it legal for my employer to just fire me like that?" Ice responded that in most states employees, can be fired at any time for any reason. However, if the employer believes that the discharge was based on discrimination; Since there are no anti discrimination agency in Mississippi, Ice advise employers are able to file a viable complaint, regardless of immigration status, to the United States EEOC within 180 days to investigate. With Ice’s experts in law, she volunteers to be an attorney for the MIRA in 2001. She later became a staff member for MIRA in 2006 and created the MIRA Legal project that helped over 50 countries.
The company offered inconsistent versions of why Mr. Gill was terminated and who did the termination. They were indifferent to Mr. Gill’s concerns and did nothing to address those employees engaging in blatant racial harassment even after other black employees complained and, most damaging, the company retaliated against Mr. Gill when he complained by terminating his
Derrick L. Kincade, a former software implementation consultant for PROS, Inc. ("PROS"), claims the company violated chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code by (1) withdrawing an alleged promotion he had received based on his race (African American); (2) creating a hostile work environment based on two racially offensive notes he anonymously received at work; (3) retaliating against him for having filed an EEOC charge of discrimination by not allowing him to continue to work from home and by requiring a doctor's note for an absence; and (4) after securing other employment and giving two weeks' notice of resignation, by constructively discharging him. PROS is entitled to summary judgment on these claims under Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 166a(c) and 166a(i)
Thus, an employer violates Title VII when the workplace is filled with discriminatory sex-based intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim 's employment and create an abusive working environment. In order to establish that she has an actionable claim for sexual harassment in the workplace under Title VII, Mrs. Singleton was required to exhibit that the offensive conduct was unwelcome, was based on her sex, was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive work environment, and was imputable to her employer (Wellington-James, 2015).
The Civil Rights act of 1964 along with Title VII gives employees the option to sue business owners based on color, race, sexual orientation, and religion. This act, rules on the fact, that individuals can take action if a discrimination or harassment issues happens at the employer’s workplace. It expands Civil Rights statues to provide more protection against people who are victimized due to discrimination. It sets the guidelines for job related issues due to disparate impact or treatment issues. However, this act does not assure that everyone who faces discrimination will be employed because frankly he is a minority. If it is felt that there is a possibility of
Whether or not the actions of Ms. Leslie Gonzales towards Mr. Ray Garcia establishes an act of sexual harassment.
Peter Nicholson wishes to convert the factory in the north east to production of the electric taxi. Using data in Appendix C, Table 1, calculate payback period and the average rate of return.