Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Title VII of the 1994 civil rights Act offers protection to individuals against being subjected to discrimination that is grounded   on color, race, national origin, religion as well as sex.  Title VII is only relevant  to  the employers dealing  with  fifteen or more  employees  which is inclusive of  local  as well as  state  governments (SHRM, 2017).  It is additionally, applicable to agencies of employment as well as labor and federal government organizations.  Equal chances  in employment  cannot  be  declined  to any  individual  based  on their  perceived  racial status,  race  associated  features  such as  color  and facial features  or  because they  have associated themselves  with  persons  of a certain  racial  color  or sex.  In addition,  the Act  makes prohibition  of  the  decisions of employment  that are developed  on the  assumptions and  judgments  that  regards  to traits, capabilities  or the performance  of persons  based on their sex or  racial  groups (SHRM, 2017).

All the prohibitions  that are addressed by Title VII are relevant regardless  of whether  the  conducted discrimination  was being directed  at  Blacks, Whites, Native Americans, Latinos, Arabs, Asians , mixed racial  persons  or individuals  or any color,  race  or  ethnicity (SHRM, 2017).  Discrimination against  any person  in  regard  to hiring, promotion,  recruitment, transfer, performance measurements, work duties, work  surrounding,  discharge,  discipline, job training, benefits  and salaries or any additional requirement, condition  or employment privilege.  Title VII does not  solemnly  prohibits  direct  or intended  discrimination but also to the  neutral  policies  of a job  that  inappropriately  impacts  individuals  of  a particular, sex,  color, or race  that are  not associated  to the  business  or the  necessities  of the  job(SHRM, 2017).  Employers are  therefore  necessitated  to  adopt  the  most appropriate practices  that are  aimed  at  lowering the possibility  of  discrimination  occurrence  and  to ensure  that  equal  employment  chances  impediments  are  adequately  addressed (SHRM, 2017).

The primary protections under Title VII include the following beginning with hiring, promotion and recruitment.  The  requirements  of the job  are required  to  be consistent  and  uniformly  utilized  to individuals  of all  colors  and races (DesJardins, & McCall, 2014).  Even  with the consistent  application  of a job  and it is  not significant  for the  needs  of the  business  of performance , the requirements  can be  considered to  be  illegal in situation  when it  eliminates  individuals  of a particular race group  or their color  more as  compared  to others.  Samples  of the possible unlawful  performances  includes the solicitation application from the primary  sources in  which  most of the  potential  employees  will be derived  from  a similar color or race.  An addition illegal performance  is the  requirement  for  applicants to possess  a certain  background in education  that  is not significant  for the  needs of the  business or even performance.  The  last  example  is the  testing of  skills,  knowledge, experience or capabilities  which is  not significant  to the  needs of the business (DesJardins, & McCall, 2014).

Employers can legitimately  necessitate  data  that  regards  the applicants  or  even the  existing  employees for  objective purposes action . The  primary  methodology that  racial  data of the  employees can be obtained  and  at the same  time  protect  them against  selections  that are discriminatory is  the utilization  of  different  form  that helps in  ensuring  that  their  racial  data is kept separate  from the  primary  application (Gutman, Koppes & Vodanowich, 2010).  In this form this ensures that the employers can utilize the data and store it without allowing it to be utilized in evaluations or other forms of promotion.  Unless  the  acquired  data is  legal addressing  or questioning  applicants or employees  on the basis  of  race  is a major suggestion  that  racial  status  is utilized as part of decision  making. If the information  is then utilized in the exclusion  of  some  individuals from  the  participation of certain  roles, recruitment  or promotion  this  is a component of discrimination  evidence (Gutman, Koppes & Vodanowich, 2010).

Title VII additionally offers protection against hostile work environment. Offensive conducts such as promoting ethnic disgrace, racial jokes, verbal or even physical behaviors that are aimed at undermining persons of a certain sex, race or skin color.  Under the Act employers are highly necessitated to avoid and offer corrections to all illegal harassment (Pynes, 2004).  Compensation and all other terms, privileges and conditions of employment are also protected. Therefore,  color, sex, race  or  national  origin  cannot be utilized  as the  basis  for  the  differences  that are placed  on  job duties,  benefits, salaries, training, discipline , training  or any other related  condition (Pynes, 2004). Classification  and  employees segregation  is  also  prohibited  in that  assignment  and  positions  should not be  denied  or preserved  to a particular  group  based  on  its racial  superiority  or privileges. Employees  have the privilege under Title VII to  exist  under  freely from retaliation for their  arguments  against discrimination  or  any  other  participation that  might have  affected  the  corporation (Pynes, 2004).

A Hypothetical Case of Misconduct

Ms Stephanie was recently hired  as an  assistant Human resource  manager  based  on high  expertise, competence, skills  and  abilities  required  for  her  role.  She  works under  Mr. Schuster who manages  and owns  the  organization  that deals  with  surveys  of  marines  as the primary  business. She was entitled to less pay and benefits as compared to males in lower position with the justification that men performed more technical duties.   On  several  occasions,  the manager  has  been making undesirable  comments  regarding Stephanie’s  body  which makes  her  very uncomfortable especially  because she has  to make  daily reports  to him  on the  ongoing  operations or  any other event.  Given the position of Mr. Schuster, Stephanie was reluctant to make any reports regarding the matter.  However,  in several  occasions Mr. Schuster  touched  and  make several  attempts to  touch  her  body  which included  her  breasts.  She complained  to Mr. Schuster  making the statements  that  the  acts  made her  uncomfortable  and  therefore he  should stop.  She was continuously  ignored and when  she approached  the  director  making  the same complains she  was  ignored  and this  did not  feel so good  since  it had  reached to the extent of making those  comments  during  subordinates meeting and  she felt belittled.  However, she learned that  for all  the employees were working directly  under  Mr. Schuster  that  was the  norm and failure to  corporate  would  result in a dismissal  from  her  duties  without  any  considerations.

Two  months  after her employment  her  employment  was  terminated on the grounds that she was slow, incompetent  and  on the decline  of engaging  in  a personal relation  with  Mr. Schuster.  Stephanie based her allegations on all the incidences that were categorized as sexual assessment.  This incorporated  statements  made of  her sexual  nature, blonde jokes  that were  clearly  stating that  she  did  not posses  much level of intelligence,  sexual touches and  the unjustified  dismissal.  With  this placed  on the complaint box  Mr. Schuster  highly admitted  that  he  had  fallen  for  Stephanie’s attraction  since she was  making advances  and  even  made a proposition  for a relationship between them.  All the allegations that he received were countered with different claims.  He made the statement  that Stephanie  had  made  a sexual  introduction  in  his office by  offering  a kiss  on the  neck  thus starting  that  she was always  dressed  in  a seductive manner.

Mr. Schuster  made the argument that  Stephanie’s  employment   had been terminated  based  on the  bad  conduct  while  representing  the  corporation  in business dealings and a bad influence of  employees.  He  added  that Stephanie  lacked  the  capability  of accomplishing any  given task  and  held  poor working performance based  on  the little evidence that  she held.  On the matter of making sexual and blonde jokes, Mr. Schuster started that Stephanie always enjoyed them all. The  outcome  was that  Stephanie  had been  offended  since  the company  offered  her the  job  based  on her  qualities. In addition , making  jokes that relates  to  one’s race  was  offensive  since their color  should be  exclusive from any  selection.  The  fact that  her termination was  not  justified  additionally  supported  that  she had been  offended and discriminated against because  she  was a woman and a blonde  one  in the  case.  The fact that  she earned less as compared  to other  males  in lower  roles and received less benefits  is an  additional  form of  discrimination  that is offered  protection under Title VII.

Gender  any other  form of  discrimination  presents the  organization  at the risks  of  heavy  penalties, reduced  production, lowered performance , a negative reputation, destructions, family responsibilities  and promotions. Title VII offers adequate protection to persons in regard to race, national origin, and color sex and so on.  Women, men  and  individuals  from  different  nations  and races  are therefore  required  to  be  given  the  same  form of treatment  while performing  tasks, being  hired, recruited  or even  promoted  based on the job’s necessities  and  not  racial or sex features (Pynes, 2004).  Discrimination  presents  the organization  to  low production  since  individuals  are bound  to  lose  their  motivation  or the  ability  of perform  takes  effectively.  Making jokes that regards to the gender of the employee, color or race affects individuals emotionally.  In  addition the  prejudices  that  regards genders can  lead to the supervisors  in engaging to  unlawful practices  by  ignoring  those  that are  supposed  to  be promoted  based on their  origin  or skin  color (Gutman, Koppes & Vodanowich, 2010).  In  that  this  creates  and promotes the notion  that men  are supposed  to get  higher  roles  with more benefits  and salaries  based  on their  perceived  responsibilities as well as  abilities.  This may create high burdens on both the employers are the employees based on the required responsibilities.  This  is  bound to  expose  the  corporation  to the burdens  of destructions  since those  that are subjected  to discrimination  get a strong sensation  of the loss  of self worth and resentment  that  may  generate  damages.  This may be manifested as property destruction, physical violence and a negative reputation.  The ability of the corporation to retaining employed who are qualified, highly skilled and experience may be affected which may lead to additional costs.

The  most appropriate  action  course  for the  employee  is to  get  their  job back  but in a different  supervision  and position  to avoid the occurrence of retaliation.  The employee has proved their ability, skills and competence by not falling for personal relationships with her manager.  In addition, her responsibilities and duties have been accomplished effectively without fail which shows that she deserves the role. In addition,  she should  be given the necessarily  benefits  and  salary  that suits  her position  and  responsibility  without  consideration  of her  race, sex or color  since performance is not based  on either.

Discrimination should be highly prevented in the workplace since it results in destruction rather than benefits (Griffin, 2007).  Diversity should be accepted highly and particularly in the modern society that is highly driven by globalization.  In order  for the  occurrence to be prevented  the organization should begin  with  gaining familiarity  with  the application  of anti-discrimination  laws and policies. All the managers should understand and ensure that they apply the laws in any selection or situation.  In addition  employees should be encouraged  to read and review  discrimination  laws  through  making it to  be a compulsory  training for better  understanding.  Also  they  should promote  high cooperation  and equality  within the organizations  through the  development  of diverse  working  groups throughout all the organizations.  In  addition,  the way  in  which  employees can  make  reports  of discrimination  should  be  fair  and well implemented  by  having  professional  and experienced HR personnel’s  who holds the capability  of handling the  issues.  in addition, if a case  of discrimination  is reported  immediate  and quick decisions should  be made  regarding the complain  to offer  justice  on the affected persons. Lastly, the corporation is highly necessitated of developing  anti- discrimination  policies  that  will ensure  that  adequate  protection  is offered  to all the  employees (Ivancevich & Konopaske, 2013).

            References

Griffin, R. (2007). Fundamentals of Management. Cengage Learning.

Gutman, A., Koppes L. Laura & Stephen J. Vodanowich. (2010). EEO Law and Personnel Practices. Psychology Press.

Joan, E. Pynes. (2004). Human Resources Management for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. John Wiley & Sons

John M. Ivancevich & Konopaske, R. (2013). Human resource management. McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Joseph R. DesJardins, & John J. McCall. (2014). Contemporary Issues in Business Ethics. Cengage Learning.

SHRM. (2017). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/titleviiofthecivilrightsactof1964.aspx