Essay On Eeoc

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) may take action when an investigation shows that there has been a violation in a person’s civil rights just because of his or her attributes.

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.

The EEOC is in place to protect the rights of individuals in the workplace. They are also laws in place that protects employees from being punished for reporting discrimination. Laws of the EEOC include:

EEO states which is that EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person 's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. These laws apply to all types of work situations, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits.

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.

The disparate treatment doctrine requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that an employer has treated some people less favorably than others because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Three provisions required to prove disparate treatment are (1) the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination; (2) the employer must articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions, and (3) the plaintiff must prove that the stated reason was in fact pretextual. Proof of discriminatory motive is critical and may be inferred from the mere fact of differences in treatment. Proof may also be inferred from the falsity of the employer’s explanation for the treatment, (Walsh, 2010).

On August 19, 2008, Mr. Contonius Gill filed a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC claiming race discrimination and retaliation for being discharged for complaining about racial harassment. On August 10, 2008 Mr. Gill filed an Employment Discrimination Complaint with the North Carolina Department of Labor. On June 2011, the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a single complaint alleging that Mr. Gill, plaintiff, was subjected to a racially hostile environment from May 2007 through June 2008, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. The matter was filed against A.G. Widenhouse, defendant.

In the case EEOC v. Kaplan, the EEOC was alleging that Kaplan’s use of credit checks was having a disparate impact for African American applicants and was in violation of Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act (EEOC v. Kaplan, 2014). In this case, Kaplan uses the same screening process that the EEOC uses itself. The EEOC states “overdue just debts increase the temptation to commit illegal or unethical acts as a means of gaining funds to meet financial obligations.” (EEOC v. Kaplan, 2014. para 1). Kaplan has similar concerns for positions that have access to student’s financial loan information as well as other positions (EEOC v. Kaplan, 2014). As consistent with other rulings, the EEOC has the responsibility to provide statistical proof of the disparate impact in violation of the Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act. This proof must be provided by a reliable expert and cannot rely on nationwide criminal justice statistics (Fliegel & Mora, 2013). Under review of this case, there were multiple concerns with the evidence that was presented. The EEOC relied solely on the statistical data compiled by Kevin Murphy. The district court excluded Murphy’s evidence on the grounds that it was unreliable. The EEOC did not provide sufficient proof that Murphy’s methodology satisfied any of the factors that courts required to determine the reliability of the data. Even Murphy admitted that his sample was not a true representation of Kaplan’s entire application pool.

• The fact that Anita said that the plaintiff will probably get job with the fact that the plaintiff had performance evaluation than the younger woman awarded the promotion led the plaintiff to expend emotional and financial recourses pursuing this ADEA claim in federal court. (Twomey, 2010, pg. 525)However, when analyzed by the court under a “direct evidence of discrimination “theory and under the McDonnell Douglas model, she had no case. (Twomey, 2010, pg. 525)

Is it clear to you why a court would be able to include in its remedies those who were not directly discriminated against by any employer?

The charging employee has the right to pursue their grievance in civil litigation, but only after finishing the whole administrative procedure through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission office. The processes of the civil litigation lawsuit are familiar to the prior claim processes that the charging employee experienced with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Nonetheless, there are a few steps that are different. With civil litigation, counseling of the charging employee is not needed. The employer or the defendant will be given a copy of the complaint as well as the summons of the lawsuit pending. These documents are distributed to the employer by a representative from the Sheriff's division. A ruling can be delivered a judge if the company neglects to send a reply to the complaint and summons. The progression moves forward with "discovery "when the company or defendant responds. The "discovery" stage is when both parties have to reveal documents or facts pertaining to the grievance (www.uscourts.gov, 2005).

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

Throughout the years the United States has faced many challenges with equal employment opportunities for everyone. The United States has developed The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, also known as the EEOC, to enforce laws that help prevent everyone from being treated unfairly when it comes to employment options. The EEOC has established stipulations and overlooks all of the federal equal employment opportunity regulations, practices and policies (“Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination Questions and Answers”). Some laws that have been passed are the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Although some discrimination is still a problem, all of these

Discrimination occurs when an employee suffers from unfavorable or unfair treatment due to their race, religion, national origin, disabled or veteran status, or other legally protected characteristics. Employees who have suffered reprisals for opposing workplace discrimination or for reporting violations to the authorities are also considered to be discriminated against. Federal law prohibits discrimination in work-related areas, such as recruiting, hiring, job evaluations, promotion policies, training, compensation and disciplinary action. (employeeissues.com, 2006)

What’s worse, race discrimination is hardly to be proved when it is actually charged by employees. In 2014, “the EEOC received 31,073 charges alleging race-based discrimination, but dismissed 71.4% of them due to a lack of reasonable cause” (Vega, 2015).