Mitsubishi Essay

Another law the plant may be violating is the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This law “forbids discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” (Noe, Hollenback, Gerhart & Wright, 2011). According to the case, the plant employs approximately 1,500 workers and one third of the workforce is Hispanic (Fransson, Gareett & Noll, 2005). The plant mostly hires Hispanic to

In a study that was reviewed by Deitch and her colleagues (2003), blacks were interviewed at work about whether the felt they were being discriminated. Most participants had difficulty answering because they were not sure whether discrimination was linked to their race or different factors like gender. Such inconclusive research only adds to the haziness of work related issues defined as ones of “racial discrimination” (Deitch, Barsky, Butz, Chan, Brief & Bradley).

During the last part of this century, businesses and organizations have heavily relied on affirmative actions laws to ensure equal employment opportunities. The failure of this dependence upon legislation is that is doesn't address the full spectrum of diversity in the workplace (6). Affirmative actions laws have limitations, discriminating against people holding protected-class status such as women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans,

For example, when Keiko goes shopping, the cashier refuses to serve her because she’s Japanese. Both Native Americans and Japanese Americans faced racism during these

A reason why it was an act of racism is because even though their ethnicity is japanese, they are still an american citizen. Although they were american citizens, they were still placed into internment camps because the government believed that they were a threat. As a result, they made a justification to place japanese-americans into internment camps. In paragraph 4 of the article “Japanese-American Internment Was An Unnecessary And A Racist Act” it states, “ Uno says the claim that japanese-americans were relocated for their own protection was ‘sheery hypocrisy’ and denies that japanese-americans posed a national security threat. Instead, he calls the relocation a crime attributable to ‘racism’ and economic and political oppurtunism.” This supports my claim because it shows how placing japanese americans was an act of racism. Like I said, even though their ethnicity is japanese, they are still an american citizen.

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 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Mitsubishi Motors in April of 1996 in regard to claims of widespread sexual harassment at the company’s plan in Normal, Illinois. “The lawsuit contends that as many as 700 women were subjected to groping and sexual remarks, creating a "hostile and abusive work environment" that went unchecked for years at the Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America plant” (“U.S. Charges,” 1996). It is despicable that situation like this was allowed to happen and perhaps even more astonishing is the magnitude at which it took place. While most of the harassment “came from male assembly line workers or low-level managers,” high-level managers at plant knew of the offenses and allowed them to take place without consequences (“U.S. Charges,”

The Japanese Americans sustained many injustices during the pre-World War Two era, including exclusion from traditional establishments and occupations. It was noted, “the [economic] argument and the discriminatory measures are plain contradictions” (Goto 105-106). Although the stated goal of Californians was to have a unified population, their actions belied their true motives. The colossal nature of the assimilatory feats performed by Japanese dictated that “even Californian agitators themselves, in their moments of private reflection, admit the wonderful power of adaptability of Japanese,” but, “in public they do everything to prevent the process of assimilation from running its natural course” (Goto 106). Often, the bigoted owners of white establishments barred people of Japanese

Charges of workplace discrimination is said to be at an all time high. During the 2015 fiscal year the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity released information that claims there were more than 89,000 charges filed for workplace discrimination. One of the top ten charges is said to be retaliation, which had an estimate 39,757 cases in 2015, which is 44.5 percent of all charges filed. Retaliation is said to be in violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, For the purpose of this research paper I will provide the understanding of both Acts, while also taking a case that deals with to provide the basis of the case, the findings, and the outcome of the charges.

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).

In a perfect world, people would be equal in rights, opportunities, and responsibilities, despite their race or gender. In the world we live in, however, we always face all kinds of neglect based on different attributes. All over the United States, certain people treat others with prejudice because of particular features they possess. Unfortunately, prejudice and discrimination occur even in places which, by definition, should be free of all personal prejudices – specifically, in offices and other business surroundings. This tragedy is called workplace discrimination; not every unfair behavior at work, however, can be assessed as discrimination. Discrimination in the workplace happens when an employee experiences unfair treatment due to their race, gender, age, religion, marital status, national origin, disability or veteran status, or other characteristics. Discrimination is one of the largest issues people face in the workplace and it must be dealt with. The U.S. have laws and regulations on discrimination but it still often occurs. Workplace discrimination appears in hiring, training, promotion, firing, and other institutional or interpersonal treatment. Discrimination sometimes causes an employee to leave or quit the workplace, resign from a position, or in more severe cases, to commit suicide or act violently against the discriminators. Discrimination is one of the largest issues many people face in the workplace.

My higher educational studies have imparted me with a firm foundation for a degree level qualification. Studying

This paper will assess my personal experience with prejudice in the workplace, including the implications of the situation to the organization in terms of its stakeholders, reputation, and its legal responsibilities. Furthermore, I will analyze the negative effects the discriminatory behavior had on morale and functioning of coworkers and employees. Lastly, I will recommend three action steps that I would have taken as a manager to avoid the situation, in addition to three steps to render the situation.

The managers were also not trained properly and maintained a centralized management approach. An HMSI manager was quoted in the statement saying, “The Japanese do not understand the workers’ language.” Management failed to understand the ideas brought to them by workers, “could not understand the organizational working from the employees’ point of view.” It was said that the Japanese failed to give Indian managers enough power to solve problems. The Indian managers were production specialists, who had very little understanding of industrial relations issues.