Misclassification Case Summary

The review of Chern’s Flagship Store and analyzing its full-time sales associates hiring data for evidence of adverse impact, “a substantially different rate of selection in employment decisions that adversely affects a protected group, protected groups under title VII of Civil Right Act include race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age discrimination, and the American with Disabilities Act (Phillips, Gulley, 2015). This evaluation described by, Section 4D of the Uniform Guidelines states that “a selection rate for any race, sex, or ethnic group which is less than 4/5ths (or 80%) of the rate for the group with the highest rate will generally be regarded by the

Issue Identification: This memo presents an analysis of the employment classifications for the state employees of New Mexico, specifically an analysis of the discrepancies that have been brought up regarding a position within the Human Services Department and the Department of Labor. Currently, the position of “Employment Counselor” in the State of New Mexico holds two different classifications under the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Human Services Department (HSD). Ms. Rose Paddock, an Employment Counselor for the state of New Mexico under HSD has acquired assistance from her union, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Local #2839 as they believe that the State of New Mexico has violated the principle of a public sector organization by not grouping the identical positions in the same classification. The issue at hand is whether same job titles can be classified differently by an employer even if the job specifications and qualifications are the same; the only difference is that these state employees are placed in different departments.

Employment Vignettes are short cases with employments issues dealing with hiring, firing, demoting, and compensating individuals. Most of these issues can be address by Affirmative Action and discrimination laws .An affirmative action program is a management tool designed to ensure equal opportunity in recruiting, hiring, training, promoting, and compensating individuals. A good affirmative action program is a diagnostic tool that evaluates the composition of the workforce and compares it with the composition of the relevant labor pool and then includes practical steps addressing under utilization of specific groups. A number of federal and state statutes mandate that certain contractors maintain a written affirmative action program.

Employers should not treat their employees as a potential criminal. At the end of the book, it said, “Stop treating working people as potential criminals and let them have the right to organize for better wages and working conditions.” (238). When Barbara worked at Key West, Florida, the employer said they heard

Employers that base employment decisions, including hiring and promotion, on protected class characteristics are engaging in disparate treatment. When they do so overtly and argue that it is necessary to limit a particular type of employment to people with specific protected class characteristics, this type of disparate treatment is termed a facially discriminator policy or practice. An important, but limited, defense is available to employers that adopt facially discriminatory requirement is legal. If an employer can show that a particular protected class characteristic is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) for the job in question, the facially discriminatory requirement is legal. According to the Title VII of the Civil Right Act,

This case was based on facts and opinions from Peter Ramirez as being an employee for Yosemite Water Company as a route sales representative/relief sales representative. This case was filed because Mr. Ramirez felt that he wasn’t getting paid properly for all the jobs and duties he performed at the company. Also, the case was to resolve whether a bottled water driver was entitled to overtime pay or whether he was outside salesperson and being exempt from the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. Mr. Ramirez left the company and then he brought action against Yosemite for unpaid overtime wages. Yosemite defense was that Mr. Ramirez was an outside salesperson and exempt from wage and overtime laws. The best way to avoid costly lawsuits is with careful review of employee classifications (Hsiao-Ying and Kleiner, 2005).

The Fair Labor Standards Act has been amended many times and is virtually an ever-changing law, however, it does not cover all employees. There are several classes of “exempt” employees, including salaried employees in the executive/managerial, administrative, and professional areas. Outside salespeople are also considered exempt. One of the issues facing companies today is knowing which employees are exempt and which are non-exempt. There are tests to determine if an employee is exempt. In 2004 the tests changed to a standard test, which is whether or not the employee’s salary is $455/week or greater and the duties test, which allows for exempt status if more than 50% of the work performed by an individual is “exempt work.” (Pass and Broadwater) Exempt employees do not receive overtime pay, which can be a substantial cost savings to a company. My previous employer required that an exempt manager close the center each night even though we had non-exempt team leads who acted as managers in most capacities. The reason was to avoid overtime costs.

The following essay describes discrimination lawsuits brought up against the Hooters restaurant chain. Employees in Michigan filed suit and said they were discriminated for being overweight while employed as servers. According to Leanne Convery, who was one of the women who fired, she weighed 115 pounds at the time and four-feet-eleven at the time. She was encouraged to take stimulants such as Adderall and appetite suppressants to speed up weight loss (Foley, 2010). Hooters found a way to navigate the discrimination laws using bona fide occupation qualifications (BFOQ).

In 1980, a precedent was set in a Michigan court case involving a man named Charles Toussaint who was suing his employer, BlueCross Blue Shield, for wrongful termination based on the guidelines set in the employee manual (Alfred and Bertsche 33). The manual stated that employees would only be terminated for just cause, and the court decided that Blue Cross had violated the agreements in the employee manual (34). The court also ruled that even with Blue Cross’s efforts to provide a document that “issued non-binding guidelines” the employee manual was a contract and Toussiant was wrongfully terminated (34). After the precedent set by this case many employers and employees for that matter were reviewing their employee manuals for the type of

Employee B, in accordance with the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA), has been violated with age discrimination due to the fact that his performance review was rated at an “above average” in comparison to the 32 year old that had his annual review rated at “adequate.” The (OWBPA) was an amendment to the (ADEA) in 1990, specifically drafted to ensure that fair treatment and labor rights are afforded to any employee over the age of 40.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, offended parties may sue businesses who separate on the premise of race, shading, sex, religion, or national cause. Managers who purposefully separate are evident possibility for a claim, yet the courts additionally permit offended parties to demonstrate risk if the business has treated classes of individuals diversely utilizing clearly nonpartisan work arrangements. The dissimilar effect hypothesis of obligation will succeed if the offended party can demonstrate that these job approaches had the impact of barring persons who are individuals from Title VII's ensured classes. When dissimilar effect is built up, the business must legitimize the proceeded with utilization of the technique or methodology

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

Everyone agrees that workplace discrimination has no place in the modern business world. But not everyone understands the laws that protect employees against discrimination. In this case, what you don’t know can hurt you, especially if an aggrieved employee files a discrimination claim.

Title VII states that an employee cannot be treated differently because of sex unless sex is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ). When used as a defense, bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) allows an organization to hire and employ individuals on the basis of the qualifications reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise. This paper will discuss the necessary steps employers must take in order to justify using sex as a discriminator when hiring employees and review some known cases where BFOQ was used as a defense.

Classifying the title, shift leader as exempt is more complicated than it seems. A journalist for the Chicago Tribune, Rex Huppke (2012) says, “There was a time when job titles were simple. You were either “the boss” or “not the boss.” Today times has changed, the FLSA (2010) says, some jobs are classified as exempt by definition. For instance, in this case the Jones Department store titled their employees shift leader, but fail to distinguish administrative employees from operational or production employees and called their statues exempt without corrective qualification. Consequently, the department manager assumes the same, though pattern and classifies Jane, a shift leader, exempt without prior job classification. Douglas McGregor (1960) mentions, these are the assumptions about human nature how upper, middle, and lower level management attitudes and assumptions are either effective or ineffective because some managers and leaders who make unconscious assumptions (Milakovich & Gordon, 2009).