Equal Employment Opportunity and HRM Term Paper
- Length: 6 pages
- Sources: 4
- Subject: Careers
- Type: Term Paper
- Paper: #32667294
Excerpt from Term Paper :
Equal Employment Opportunity & HRM
Reasons for not hiring pregnant women
Models exhibiting wrestling apparel need to have ideal physical characteristics and attractive body structures, for they are often required to wear appealing costumes like bikinis. A model wearing bikini is required to have the ideal proportions of muscle and fat on the body, along with an attractive body structure that has features of outstanding feminism.
A number of arguments in the recent past have tried to identify the characteristics that determine the ideality of physical shape and characteristics of a bikini model considering aspects of healthy looks and attraction. A number of bikini models are accepted with a number of different body shapes and characteristics. Ideally, the models should have a narrow waist, while bust and hips should be comparatively wider. The proportion of these features determines which shape the body of the model has: hourglass, pear, apple of banana. A pregnant women nevertheless fails to meet the criterion mentioned above.
The reasons Stan's Discrimination case did not go anywhere
Regional attorney for Atlanta district office of EEOC, Robert Dawkins addressed the issue of caregiver humiliation, which became an increasing issue in the workplace environments, primarily due to changing locations of the workplace (HR Focus, 2008).
Caregiver discrimination is not addressed in EEOC policies however, discrimination related to sex or race will be considered offensive under the same laws. He said that women are likely to be a victim of sex discrimination considering a number of cases where women are the primary caretakers of children and the old (HR Focus, 2008).
According to Dawkins, a woman receives a comparatively high credit at the point of being a caretaker as compare to a man, but however, in case of work i.e. jobs and businesses men are known to be more expert and experienced in their occupation, whereas, women are found to be less competent because of their additional responsibilities. This is considered as sex discrimination (HR Focus, 2008).
The women, on the other hand, are likely to enjoy certain benefits that men cannot actually have. The reason behind this is that men are not looked upon as caregivers like women are. As said by Grossman, there had been many cases regarding strongest caregivers and these were truly found by men. These cases actually involved parental rejection, which was in fact only affordable to the female members (HR Focus, 2008).
The case of a caregiver is handled in a way similar to the other discrimination cases. In order to prove sex favoritism against those workers that are involved in care giving responsibilities, certain verifications need to be brought up. Dawkins further added that it is the responsibility of the charged group to declare that he/she had been provided a separate treatment on the basis of sex. However, none of the aforementioned scenarios came into play in this case as the pregnant women simply did not fit the criteria of the Wellness Food and Apparel. The criteria for Wrestling Apparel were to have ideal physical characteristics and attractive body structure, for the model was often required to wear appealing costumes like bikinis (HR Focus, 2008).
Protecting Wellness Foods and Apparel from discrimination charges
In this context, discrimination is one of the significant issues to deal with, which can be destructive for the company. A lawsuit on discrimination will be highly expensive to deal with and will destroy company's image. Since the retention is important in every case, it is required by HR department to take care of issues simulating discrimination (HR Focus, 2008).
Managers of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) constantly monitor the situation and address any issues of discrimination being claimed. Regional managers of EEOC were provided information about handling and elimination of discrimination from workplace environment in a recent conference including the EEOC, American Bar Association and the American Law institute (HR Focus, 2008).
Managers argue that there are a number of erroneous behavioral practices that may not be included in the anti-discrimination policies of EEOC, but are equally likely to induce discrimination, indirectly (HR Focus, 2008).
Regional attorney in San Francisco district office, William R. Tamayo, representing EEOC argues that only in the year 2007 there were 83,000 discrimination cases received by the commission. In 2006 the number was lesser by 7000. Reports of race discrimination amongst these discrimination claims rose from 35% to 37% in the same period. Workplace harassment and termination had the highest reported ratio (HR Focus, 2008).
The attorney said that workplace harassment cases in the period of 2006 to 2007 rose from 12% to 15% that caused high concerns. 25% of the EEOC issues being dealt with are comprised of these charges (HR Focus, 2008).
According to the attorney, a constant lack of understanding of behaviors, which caused indirect discrimination in the workplace in the companies, is found in the supervisors to the subordinates, equally in those who are offenders and those who are victims. It was often witnessed that supervisors or subordinates, facing discrimination or testifying it, state their lack of familiarity with the anti-discrimination policies (HR Focus, 2008).
Tamayo exclaimed that the supervisors need to know every single aspect of the issue and they should develop behavioral maturity in correctly addressing it. According to the attorney, companies are responsible to train the supervisors to tackle any issues and their resolution (HR Focus, 2008).
The attorney claimed that the training in the company itself is effective in resolution and elimination of workplace discrimination and harassment. However, it is not the sole element that resolves the problem; it's the "follow-up corrective action" that is required along as a feedback (HR Focus, 2008).
Attorney for New York district office, Elizabeth Grossman, describes that employers ask EEOC for the training practices for their supervisors and subordinates. However, it is the duty of the employer to determine the required training practices which fit right in with the decorum and structure of the workplace environment of his company (HR Focus, 2008).
Attorney suggested that the best way to deal with workplace discrimination and harassment is to train the employees with specific practices that target the company's workplace structure (HR Focus, 2008).
Tamayo puts light on another aspect of the issue which rises when the team of investigation is not necessarily competent. It is common perception that investigations resulting in perfect resolution cause the investigators to build a good character. However, it is the opposite in the court room, where perfect resolution may be considered as a result of complete ignorance of the issue by the investigator. He also mentioned that if pure investigations are carried out by the investigators, their recommendations are often rejected by the supervisors. Attorney adds that investigations should start within a few days of the report, for delay can cause illegitimate or pressurized resolution of the issue unjustly (HR Focus, 2008).
Tamayo suggested that supervisors should make it sure that the initial resolution of the issue should not have retaliatory nature. It is due to the fact that 25% of discrimination cases reported retaliation that grabs the courts' attention (HR Focus, 2008).
Certain practices have been suggested by Dawkins which would avoid discrimination among caregivers. These include (HR Focus, 2008):
• Educating and informing the staff about their tasks, responsibilities and rights.
• The job interviews must not include inquiries regarding personal responsibilities or roles.
• no assumptions to be made based on employee's care giving responsibility
• Providing a criterion and implementing objectives to the work provided by care givers.
• No discrimination, among employees.
• Enhancing decision making along with supervision. This would help to achieve the set criteria if all the individual elements exist.
• The work place should be inclusive where employee's esteem needs are met.
In addition, as said by Duston, the human resource should keep in mind certain factors. The job for them has not been changed, meaning the accommodation and defenses that were earlier provided by the employer are still the same. Those defenses include, excessive hardships, the direct threats and other altered services and programs. The threats include individual's health and safety, whereas, accommodation would force managerial or financial hardships for the employer. Duston further advised all the employees to follow the previous track, they had been following earlier (HR Focus, 2010).
STEP1: never to ignore the requests made by the employees. These requests and wishes are made on the basis of their mental or physical conditions. At this point it is practical to apply ADA (HR Focus, 2010).
STEP2: functions and standards are very essential. Consider them whenever you note down a request from an employee. Understand the importance of it and if the accommodation is convenient then do not hesitate to provide it, unless you figure out that it is creating hardships (HR Focus, 2010).
STEP 3: the analysis of ADA: the employers must ensure that the burden will be affordable but if the burden is expected to be high then there comes the need to carry out formal analysis. The analysis would consider…