Constructive Discharge
Memo: Constructive Discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Chief Executive Officer
Company Executive and Board of Staff
Response to the accusation of Constructive discharge filed against this company
I am writing this Memorandum to advise your office on the way forward in relation to the issue of constructive discharge filed against this company. As you know, an employee of this company has claimed that the recent changes in work-shifts schedule have been structured purposely to constrain their religious practices. In fact, the employee has filed legal charges grounding this company in a greater risk of contravening Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This memo provides a clear and resounding response on what is to be done to contain this situation. The memo will prove how this company could have violated the law by constrain employee religious rights (holy day). Secondly, the memo will recommend on what is to be done as a response to the constructive discharge. A decisive recommendation on how the company can minimize contravention of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is also provided.
How constructive discharge as a legal concept is relevant to the scenario.
It is evident from the employee's argument that the justification presented may have significant effects on constructive discharge. This is based on the knowledge that the employee alleges various accounts of violation of religious rights. Constructive discharge refers to the general misconduct of the employer, which prompts an employee to abandon the work. In any case, constructive discharge heavily revolves around employer-derived offenses like sexual harassment or denial of religious rights (Kaplin, & Barbara 2006, p. 411). In June 14,...
Civil Rights Act of 1964 enforced the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution by ensuring a legislative act that would prevent discrimination and extend equal protection under the law. The bill in its entirety protects all Americans, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, national background, and gender. It was and still is considered to be a landmark bill, in spite of the fact that the Fourteenth Amendment already technically guarantees equal protection
" Gelato currently employs 100 people, 85% being 25 -- 35 years old. We currently do not know the "age makeup" of the surrounding community. To ensure that it complies with the demands of the ADEA, Gelato should analyze the community in terms of age ranges, including the age ranges encompassing ages 40 -- 70 years, and should institute recruiting and hiring policies that phase in age ranges compatible with
However, this is really not a distinct difference to Title IV law in regards to religion. It may be seen as analogous to not creating a hostile workforce environment by, for example, prohibiting all pregnant employees for no justifiable reason, which would discriminate against women, or prohibiting an employer from displaying the Confederate flag in his or her office, which would create a harassing environment for African-Americans, just as requiring
Accommodating Religion Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act "prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin," a provision which lies at the heart of the August 22, 1995 Wall Street Journal article entitled "Legal Beat: Workers' religious beliefs may get new attention. ("Title VII") It is the prohibition against religious discrimination that the article claims Wal-Mart violated when they forced an employee to quit as
Hostile Work Environment: According to the 1993 decision of the United States Supreme Court in "Harris v. Forklift Systems Inc.," hostile environment harassment occurs when "the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment" (Cross and LeRoy Miller 497). Facts of the Case: In 1986, Teresa Harris, who was
Constructive discharge materializes when an employee's only option is to quit their place of employment due to the employer making working conditions unbearable. In the scenario with the religious employee, the employee made it clear that he/she cannot work on a holy day due to his/her religious principles that are guarded under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This mandatory shift forced on the employee created an
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now