Cronan analysis Essay

The Americans with Disabilities Act has come a long way with helping to protect and obtaining justice for the disable opening the door for jobs and creating more adequate access to public spaces to an estimated 43 million disabled people however, corrective disabilities are more of a challenge. People whose disabilities that can be remedied with eyeglasses, medications, etc. are not covered by the ADA (Post, 1999). Justice Sandra Day O’Conner supports this action and wrote three provisions that led to the conclusion that remediable conditions are not a disability (Post, 1999).

This was just three years after Congress had voted down an amendment to Title VII to include age discrimination as an unlawful employment practice (www.eeoc.gov). In 1972, Title VII was amended to include the Equal Employment Opportunity Act which promises equal opportunities for all of mankind. The Rehabilitation Act was passed in 1973 which prohibits the Federal Government, as an employer, from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities. In 1976, in General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, the Supreme Court ruled that health insurance for employees providing sickness and accident benefits for any disability but those arising as a result of pregnancy did not constitute sex discrimination under Title VII (www.eeoc.gov).

The Americans with Incapacities Act (ADA) got to be law in 1990. The ADA is a social equality law that forbids oppression people with handicaps in every aspect of open life, including employments, schools, transportation, and all open and private places that are interested in the overall population. The motivation behind the law is to ensure that individuals with handicaps have the same rights and open doors as other people. The ADA is separated into five titles (or segments) that identify with distinctive ranges of open life.(Eeoc.gov, 2015)

First, the legal issues, in this case, are The Equal Employment Opportunity Commision filed a sex discrimination lawsuit against the Dial Corporation. The court decided that Dial Corporation did nothing wrong and there were no legal erras on the conclusions or liabilities.

In corporate America, sexual harassment is a huge concern amongst many organizations. The matter of sexual harassment is an issue that needs to be immediately attended to in

“Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Title I does not allow any private employers, local, and state governments, labor unions and employment agencies from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in job application procedures, firing, hiring, job training, advancement and other terms, privileges, and conditions of employment” (The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of “race, color, sex, religion, and national origin” (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers, & Langvardt, 2012, p. 24). This law also includes discrimination due to sexual orientation. This was not addressed in the original law, but sexual orientation cases have been won under this law. Such is the case of, Heller v Columbia Edgewater Country Club, 195 F. Supp. 2d 1212 (D. Or. 2002) (Joslin, n.d.). This lawsuit was due to a lesbian 's employer used derogatory comments, toward her, in which the court ruled in her favor. Kate 's allegation of discrimination if proved, can be filed with the company 's Human Resource department. If that does not resolve the issue, she can file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Harassment, specifically sexual harassment, is one of those challenges faced by businesses and employers as of a result of workplace diversification. Inappropriate conversations, unwanted advances and uncomfortable physical contact are some of the ways sexual harassment can occur. According to Hellriegel and Slocum, “Sexual harassment refers to unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.” (p.52). To be clear, sexual harassment can, and has, affected both women and men over the years however up to half of all working women have reported experiencing some form of sexual harassment in the career (Vijayasiri, 2008, p.1). It wasn’t until 1986 though that the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a violation of Title VII in the case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (O’Brien, 1994, p. 1). Before the high court’s ruling, however, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had begun to address the issue by drafting hostile work environment guidelines that included sexual harassment (O’Brien, 1994, p. 4). These guidelines would serve later to guide the high court’s decision. There are many more cases like this one we could look at. In 1991, sexual harassment became a household term as Anita Hill testified before congress stating she was sexually

It is somewhat surprising that employers continue to violate employment laws dealing with discrimination. One case, Catterson v. Marymount Manhattan College, litigated and settled in 2013, was especially egregious. According to the EEOC (2013), the college had refused,

American with Disability Act (ADA) gives civil rights protections to persons with disabilities in all facets of the American society, “every man, woman, and child with a disability can now pass through once-closed doors into a bright new era of equality, independence, and freedom”, with those words on July 26, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act (ada.gov, 2009). The ADA law does not list specific disability conditions, rather, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under Title I of the Act, specifies conditions that are attributed to disability and undertakes the enforcement authority. Title1 deals with the

When the law was signed, new doors opened for the deaf and hard of hearing culture for a better opportunity in gaining equal rights. President Bush appointed four titles to protect deaf and hard of hearing people. In “The ADA and Deaf Culture” by Tucker, B. Title I, prohibits both public and private employers from refusing to hire or promote an individual because of his or her impairment and requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for applicants or employees who are deaf or hard of hearing (Tucker 28). If a deaf or hard of hearing employee can pass the essential part of the job qualification, he or she is protected by the ADA to be hired. Also, the ADA prohibits employers to discriminate disabled people in means of recruitment, job applications procedures, pay rates, and promotions. The second title, Title II, “Requires all state and local government agencies to make all of their services accessible to individuals with disability” (NAD 22). This ensures people with disability to be able to participate in services, programs, and activities who can meet the essential eligibility requirements. Such places that must make these accommodations are schools, libraries, police and fire department, public hospitals, jails and prisons, motor vehicle departments, parks and

According to the Legal Dictionary (2014), “The Wards Cove decision was severely criticized by Civil Rights leaders, who believed the Supreme Court had made disparate impact cases almost impossible to win” (p.1). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was in effect. This act proposed that employees must have proof in showing that the employer committed a disparate impact crime. No longer would it allow the victims to argue against the company based on their own views. At the same time the owner must show evidence that there is a crime committed based on these findings. Title VII along with the Civil Rights Act would dismiss any further rulings on this matter. The Supreme Court has adjusted some of the compensation methods for the disparate impact theory. It is against the law for an employer to allow different standards, conditions, or terms of the job to their workers. This

Work place policies regarding sexual harassment is the main issue discussed in this article. Sexual harassment has continued to be a challenge within the workplace. According to a recent review of sexual harassment related resolutions, employers have paid over $732,976.00 in sexual harassment fines (Hobson, Szostek, & Fitzgerald, 2015). The EEOC has issued written guidelines for appropriate strategies employers should use to handle workplace sexual harassment and specific ways to address it. It is the employer’s duty to proactively work to protect all employees from any type of sexual harassment by following sexual harassment policies and procedures that are put in place. Failure to implement and follow the policy and procedure in the workplace can and most likely will lead to liability should an EEOC investigation or lawsuit occur. The employer needs to disperse copies of the policies and procedures and post them in central locations throughout the organization and address sexual harassment in the employee handbooks. The policy and procedures need to clear

In our society sexual harassment has been in the workplace for years. The use of sexual harassment in the workplace has been remembered best as a weapon used to keep women in their place which would cause them to forfeit promotions within their organizations. It was once believed that women were the only victims but the shift is now changing men are also reporting that they are also victims of sexual harassment on the job. In 1964 the Civil Rights Act was passed and employers began to recognize that they were liable for two types of sexual harassment. The first kind of harassment is Quid pro quo when a supervisor offers the employee sexual advances in order to get or keep a job, and also this harassment is used to determined if an