Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
He asks you to explain the law relevant to his situation. What if the same thing happened at Boston University?
Unfortunately title VII does not prohibit discrimination because of an individual's sexual orientation. Though Title VII prohibits discrimination because of sex, the word sex is interpreted gender. However, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), is a proposed U.S. federal law that would prohibit discrimination against employees on the basis of sexual orientation. If it happened at Boston University, the University would pursue affirmative action and adherence to state and federal laws.
Six months after Harry was hired as a part-time retail clerk, twenty hours a week, he called in sick on a Wednesday morning..At first, his mother told the store manager that Harry had the flu and would not be in until Monday. On Monday, she stopped by and told the manager that Harry had been hospitalized early Wednesday morning after a suicide attempt and was being treated for depression. When Harry returned to work the following week after being away ten days, his work performance was better than before he had become sick. The manager decided to cut back Harry's hours from twenty hours to eight hours, in effect gradually freezing Harry out rather than firing him. What are the legal implications of the...
decided to reduce the positions in its parts department and to let employees go on the basis of seniority ("last hired, first fired") as the fairest way to lay employees off. Two employees - one black, the other white - were equally eligible for the last available position. Management decided to retain the black employee. Otherwise, the parts department would have no black employee, and 50% of its regular customers were African-American. What is the legal issue? Likely outcome to a lawsuit by the dismissed white employee? What can an employer do to avoid a legal challenge in this case? Cite case authority supporting your answer.
This is a blatant discriminatory act against the white employee. However, their ability to provide substantial evidence may prove null because there are no existing stipulators to support the perceived notions of why the employer chose to keep the black employee, especially since both employees were equally eligible. Employers may avoid the potential of a future lawsuit under these grounds by providing extensive legal reasoning and rationale for their decisions in picking one employee over another.
Business Ethics When the Truth Takes a Stretching Class Maria Bailey clearly and blatantly misrepresented the size of her start-up business, but shrugged it off saying she knew what she was "capable of doing" and just wanted to show potential clients "what we were going to be," rather than tell them the truth about how fledgling her business actually was at that time. Was it immoral for Mary Bailey to misrepresent her company? Looking
Business The Inclusive Workplace In the modern business world employees expect more and have more rights than ever. To accompany this, employees are seen as core contributors to an organization. The workplace has changed from one where employees blindly follow the guidelines of the company to complete tasks, to one where employees are central to the organization. Employees are also more educated than ever before. In recent decades, issues like employee empowerment, collaboration,
With respect to sexual harassment claims of the quid pro quo nature, one of the most important elements of modern sexual harassment principles establishes specific vicarious liability on the part of employers for failure on the part of management to redress any complaints of sexual harassment by employees (Friedman, 2005). In 2003, Courtney Price, an employee of the New York Rangers organization of the NHL sued the Rangers and their
Law Sexual Harassment Teddy's Supplies' CEO Dear Sir, In pursuing the facts of the case I think Teddy's is having a written sexual harassment policy and a method for employees to report sexual harassment -- either to the supervisor or in secret by using the www.ReportTeddysafely.com. As an employer some of the necessities stipulated by law have been followed. The Supreme Court defined two principles regarding the sexual harassment at the workplace.
However, it must be noted that the doctrine of consideration has changed and therefore seems to have fixed many of its most impractical elements, or at least that is what has been argued. One example of a change is the fact that in regards to consideration, the requirement for a benefit has moved from the requirement to show a legal benefit to simply a practical benefit. Another aspect to the
To the precedent of Paula's case, a prominent case, which exemplified the sometimes institutionalized presence of inappropriate sexuality in the workplace, came to light when "eight women and one man were fired from a North Mankato (MN) women's shelter because (allegedly) they refused to fit into the sexually charged atmosphere created by a few staff members." (Lang, 1) the clarity of motives for their collective dismissal aligned the decision