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.