Hiring Situations Situation 1 --

Hiring Situations Situation 1 -- in this particular situation, the applicant did not disclose that they had a disability nor had any need for assistance. The Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 is set up to prohibit discrimination, but also has a clause about the size of the organization, and we do not know if there are more than 15 employees (Title I has the requirement of employers with 15 or more employees to provide qualified candidates with disabilities equal opportunities to benefit from the full range of listed opportunities).

It is not legal, though, for the employer to assume the individual is disabled or requires assistance (Title 1 also restricts questions about disabilities). The employer may ask, however, about the ability to perform certain functions within the job situation, and even ask for a mock demonstration. From the information given, it is clear that the applicant either does not perceive that they have a disability, or they do not wish that their apparent disability be part of a conversation or decision about their ability to perform the job.

If the applicant is hired, though, the employer would be legally bound to accommodate appropriately (access, restrooms, etc.) (ADA, 1990). Situation 2 -- the organization in question has demographics of 95/5 male/female ratio for department heads. There are three well-qualified applicants; a white male who is a disabled war veteran, a Hispanic male, and a white female. Under the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Law and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the employer is prohibited from discriminating against candidates based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

In this case, ethnicity, gender, and prior military service should have no bearing on the decision. Instead, the employer should make the decision based on the qualifications of each individual candidate, the needs of the organizations, the specific experience and skill set brought by the candidates, the fit within the department, and the ability of the candidate to perform all of the job duties. While there may be three qualified candidates, it is unlikely that all are completely equal in terms of experience, availability, personality factors, etc.

The employer might give a modified Meyers-Briggs to see which of the candidates has the personality to work the best with other managers and subordinates. The job may require x% travel, which might eliminate one of the candidates, etc. Essentially, hiring the female simply based on the demographics would discriminate against the other candidates and therefore, is illegal (Federal Laws, 2009). Situation 5 - Our Company has a service contract with the U.S. Government (Department of Defense) to provide nurses for a military hospital.

Contractual obligations require employees with patient contact to pass a physical exam and drug test; those handing fiscal matters must pass a drug and polygraph test. Because this contact is with the Federal Government, any employee is subject to laws under the Federal Register, Agencies affiliated with the Federal Government who require drug testing must follow standardized procedures established by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Organization, use certified SAMHSA testing facilities, and comply with appropriate privacy laws (Section 7 -- Drug Testing, 2010).

The Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA) prohibits most private employers from utilizing lie-detector tests except in certain circumstances. However, if there are federal legal requirements that tests be administered, they must be done in accordance with law, EPPA fact sheets and posters must be visible, and employees must be counseled on the privacy, their rights, and the disposition of any information given (the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, 2010). In this.