Retaliation And The Title Vii Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964

The last decade has produced an explosion of racial employment discrimination lawsuits. These lawsuits have resulted in record-breaking settlements. By federally mandating every business to review the history, impact and proposed policy of Article VII these lawsuits may subside. Reviewing Title VII is a step corporate America must soon make or continue to loose much needed revenue. Our team will discuss the history of Title VII, the impact of Title VII in the workplace, who is and who is not covered under Title VII as well as propose policies that companies should have in place to avoid Title VII violations.

When it comes to court cases, every case that is heard in court is heard for one reason or another.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that protects individuals from discrimination based on religion. Religious discrimination is treating a person differently because of their religious

Through the years, America has made an overall improvement in eliminating discrimination, inequality and slavery and focusing more on inclusion, equal rights, and equal opportunity. Despite a considerable improvement, there are corporations and individuals that often revert to archaic means of treating employees, creating hostile environments. Consequently, different advocacy groups and laws still remain in effect and continue to evolve to protect the citizens and non-citizens of the USA.

Congress enacted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to ensure that all people who are seeking employment will not be discriminated against regardless of their race, national origin, color sex, or religious beliefs. In the four given examples of casting calls, it would seem that disparate treatment discrimination was blatant in the both the wording and premise of the casting notices. Since it seems to be common practice for agencies to create casting notices that openly call for certain races or colors of people, it would seem that any person who wasn’t hired for a certain part could file action with The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and have their case investigated, or be given a “right to sue” order that could possibly change the employment practices of the entertainment industry.

Alvarez and Moser explore the problem of discrimination in the large company Walmart. Many female employees claim were their discriminated against in the workplace and sued the company for the unfair treatment in salary and promotion. This article shows the information of lawsuit cases for large company. The company had more awareness suing from the employee and needed to prevent it. I will use this source for backing ground for my argument. It shows 500,000 female employees files for the lawsuit in pay and promotions in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This evidence should help me to improve my argument for discrimination in the workplace. Busteed shows that the different performance between female athletes and male athletes after graduating from college. Gallup-Purdue Index, shows that formal female athletes do better perform in their career than male athletes do. This data show how the female athletes participate in work activities and have a great achievement in the workplace and usually have a positive aspect in their sports and life. I will use this source for valid conditions of rebuttal. People might think male students perform better than female, but female are better than male students. Covert explores how women are discriminated against in the workplace. He shows 30 percent of women had the discrimination problem by using a new poll data from the Center for American Press and Elle Magazine. The different pay gap between men and women still

Title IX is part of the United States Education Amendments of 1972. It was meant to address some the flaws in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was written in order to end discrimination in various fields based on sex, religion, race, color, or national origin, in the area of employment. The drawback of this act was that it did not include any prohibition on gender discrimination in public education and federally assisted programs.Title IX was created in an

This applies to employers with 15 or more employees as well public and private colleges. Section 2000E-4 created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The Civil Rights plays a big role in the recruiting and hiring stages because it prohibits employers from asking for a educational background non related to the needs of the job applied for, giving test to applicants non related to what the job calls for, and only giving applications out to people of the same race or color. This makes it fair for qualified applicants to get a fair chance in job employment. We need to make workplaces more multi-cultural unit especially because we live in a multi-cultural nation of opportunities. I believe that the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title

In 1964 the Civil Rights Act Title VII was passed. This law prohibited employers from discriminating in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin (AAUW, 2016). The Act enforces that it is the obligation of the employer utilize reasonable accommodation for the religious practices of employees after the informs what his or her particular religious needs. The employer has a right to refuse a specific need if an undue hardship can be proven (LLI, 1992).

Retaliation is when employers takes negative action against employees who have made a complaint against the organization due to illegal treatment of the employee based on their race, sex, gender, age, or disability (Fraser & Simkins, 2010). The retaliation act was put into place as measure to protect employees from negative treatment from their management team and the organization. In the case of White versus Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railway company Sheila White was a female in an all-male organization; she was harassed by here manager and when she filed a complaint she was put into another job function and then was suspended from work for 30 days without pay (United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, 2004). In 1997 Shelia White

I think there not enough regulations of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Acts that deals with sexual harassment and discrimination. I feel that employers should be required to train managers and employees to what qualifies as sexual harassment and discrimination. Though, I believe that the Civil Right Acts, which was used to develop other forms of anti-discrimination laws and policies with the U.S marketplace. I feel that the service and retail industry could best be benefit from regulations and laws that would require these train their managers and employees with the Title VII of the Civil Rights Acts.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Retrieved February 16 2014 from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in many more aspects of the employment relationship. It applies to most employers engaged in interstate commerce with more than 15 employees, labor organizations, and employment agencies. The Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Sex includes pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions. It makes it illegal for employers to discriminate in hiring, discharging, compensation, or terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. Employment agencies may not discriminate when hiring or referring applicants. Labor Organizations are also prohibited from basing membership or union classifications on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. (law.cornell.edu, 2006)

The Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the keystone federal legislation in equal employment opportunity that covers disparate treatment and disparate impact discrimination and creates the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Disparate treatment or unequal treatment “refers to intentional discrimination and involves treating one class of employees differently from other employees” (Byars & Rue, 2004, p. 44). Disparate impact or adverse impact “refers to unintentional discrimination and involves employment practices that appear to be neutral but adversely affect a protected class of people” (Byars & Rue, 2004, p. 44).