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.
EEOC Discrimination Claim
Discrimination Complaints: A Case Study
John believes that he has been discriminated against by his employer, a private company. The nature of the alleged discrimination could be related to John's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age if 40 or older, disability, or genetic information (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC], 2010, p. 1; EEOC, n.d.). The Constitutional authority for filing a discrimination claim against an employer comes from a number of different acts, including the Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Equal Pay Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. The federal agency responsible for regulating and mediating such claims is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Protection against employer retaliation for filing a discrimination claim is also provided under these laws and regulations.
Pre-Complaint Procedures
The procedure for filing a discrimination complaint with the EEOC requires that the employee notify the employer of the grievance (EEOC, 2010, p. 5). This allows the company, or a union, the chance to resolve the complaint internally before the EEOC is contacted. This procedure must be completed in a timely manner, because EEOC regulations require John to make an initial contact with an EEOC counselor within 45 days of the discriminatory event, barring successful resolution of the grievance internally. This 45 day deadline may be extended if John can show he was not aware of the discriminatory event, or the 45 day deadline, in spite of due diligence on his part.
Once an initial contact with an EEOC counselor has been made, several options will likely be presented to John (EEOC, 2010, pp. 4-5). This includes extending the counseling period to provide time for less formal grievance procedures to run their course. If these fail then John is advised of his right to file a formal discrimination...
The entire process from the discriminatory event to the filing of a formal discrimination complaint with the EEOC cannot exceed 180 days, or if state or local laws also prohibit the alleged discriminatory act, 300 days. The pre-complaint procedures are therefore designed to provide every opportunity for the discrimination grievance to be resolved through less formal procedures, or in local or state courts, before a federal investigation begins.
Should John decide to file a civil lawsuit at the state level to recover alleged damages, these are typically heard at the superior court level (Arizona Judicial Branch, 2010). The parties to a civil suit may be required by state law to take part in a court-supervised arbitration procedure, depending on the amount of damages sought. Arbitration decisions are generally binding, but should a party appeal they are typically heard in the relevant superior court.
Appeals to superior court decisions are filed with the state court of appeals, which could decide to affirm the lower court's decision, reverse the decision, or send the case back for additional proceedings (Arizona Judicial Branch, 2010). If the John believes the appeals court decision is legally unsound, then he can request the state supreme court to review his case. If they grant a review they could affirm or reverse the lower court's decisions, or remand the case back to a lower court for further proceedings. Should John decide to appeal the decision of the state supreme court, he would have to file a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court requesting a review of his case.
Complaint Processing Procedures
Barring dismissal of the complaint by the EEOC for any number of reasons (EEOC, 2010, pp. 5-6) or obtaining a satisfactory resolution through state courts, an investigation is begun by the EEOC that must be completed within 180 days. This deadline can…
References
Arizona Judicial Branch. (2010). Guide to AZ Courts: General jurisdiction courts. Accessed June 5, 2011 at http://www.azcourts.gov/guidetoazcourts/GeneralJurisdictionCourts.aspx
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2010). Regulations: Part 1614 -- Federal sector equal employment opportunity FRFS. Retrieved June 5, 2011 from http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/directives/upload/1614-final.pdf
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (n.d.). Filing a charge of discrimination. Accessed June 5, 2011 at http://www1.eeoc.gov//employees/charge.cfm?renderforprint=1
United States Courts. (n.d.). Civil Cases. Accessed June 5, 2011 at http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/HowCourtsWork/CivilCases.aspx
At the same time, there are limits in time for filing of the suit and the first of these is that the suit must be filed within 180 days from the date of violation. This period is extended to 300 days if the charge is also covered by the state or local anti-discrimination law. For charges under ADEA, only the state limits are valid, and this may be 300
To do so, John needs to seek a Notice of Right-to-Sue from the EEOC. This document serves as proof that John filed a complaint with the EEOC, as required by the underlying statutes, and serves as his means of entry into the court system (See generally, EEOC, Filing a lawsuit, 2010). Even though the laws governing employment discrimination are federal laws, John can file his lawsuit in state court or
Transgender Employment Discrimination There is a growing body of evidence that transgender individuals frequently experience some type of discrimination during the employment process in the United States today. Although there are only a few high-profile cases, there are a significant number of employment claims being asserted. In terms of numbers, the high was reached in 1994 when almost 92,000 discrimination charges were filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Since that
Goodyear which effectively denied employees the right to sue for wage discrimination after the passing of 180 days that "Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was so incensed she read her scathing dissent aloud from the bench. She defended Lilly Ledbetter's right to sue her employer, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc. For pay discrimination on the basis of sex, giving a not-so-gentle reminder of the realities of the American workplace."
These figures dwarfed what other big businesses paid for discriminatory practices. These businesses included Texaco, Inc.; Shoney's, Inc., Winn-Dixie, Stores, Inc.; and CSX Transportation, Inc. Critics saw Coca-Cola's settlement as signaling a major breakthrough among big businesses as coming to terms with diversity in the workplace (King). Because the company has been a leader in many areas, these critics regarded it as setting an example of greater openness to
Case AnalysisCase 1: Palmateer v. International Harvester Company,85 Ill. 2d 124, 421 N.E.2d 876 (1981)Parties: In the case of Palmateer v. International Harvester Company, the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant company.Facts: The facts of the case revolved around the plaintiff's claim that he had been wrongfully terminated from his position for helping law enforcement by being essentially a whistleblower on the company.Issue: The issue at stake was whether