President Obama Racial Discrimination in Employment Cases Still High

No Comments

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Martin Luther King, Jr., the well-known leader in the African-American Civil Rights Movement, has been immortalized as President Barrack Obama inaugurated the civil rights leader’s granite memorial statue Sunday at the West Potomac Park in Washington, D.C.

King is widely recognized as one of the prominent figures of initiatives to end racial segregation and racial discrimination in the United States in 1960s. His efforts were realized when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted.

continue reading…

Disability Discrimination, Retaliation and other Employment Claims

No Comments

Disability is often determined on a case to case basis. Based on Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) definition, to be considered disabled, one must be substantially limited by his condition or disability and because of this, the employee cannot work or unable to perform his duties in a broad range of jobs. However, a disability that only affects an employee’s ability to perform a few specific jobs is not covered by the ADA definition.

Therefore, an employee cannot be presumed disabled unless his condition is evaluated and certified by a doctor. Similarly, it is illegal for an employer to simply say that an employee is disabled based on certain assumptions or allegations.

continue reading…

Derogatory Remarks as a Form of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation

1 Comment

Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination which, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), may include the following acts:

• unwelcome sexual advances
• requests for sexual favors
• other verbal or physical conduct of sexual nature

All these acts “ constitute sexual harassment when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.”

continue reading…

New Methods to Detect Employment Discrimination

No Comments

Can erring employers escape prosecution for their discriminatory policies? Not anymore.

The announcement by the US Department of Labor on its plan to develop a new data that will be used to analyzed information regarding salaries, wages and other benefits received by employees of federal contractors and subcontractors is welcome news to everyone.

The agency said the new tool will help them gather data to detect discrepancies which are often indicators of discrimination such as disparity in pay faced by female and minority workers.

continue reading…

Identifying Signs of Sexual Harassment: 6 Facts

No Comments

When does an act or gesture become an act of harassment? What constitutes sexual harassment?

Among the countless cases of sexual harassment cases in the workplace, one was recently brought by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against a Michigan-based employer and Burger King Franchise owner for sexual harassment and retaliation.

According to the federal lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, TSW Management, Inc. had violated Title VII when it subjected a group of female employees, including minors, to sexual harassment and retaliation.

continue reading…

Billion-Dollar Discrimination Suit against Wal-Mart Comes to a Halt

2 Comments

The Supreme Court ruled out the class action lawsuit filed by over 1.5 million former employees of Wal-Mart in the biggest discrimination suit of the decade.

The sex discrimination suit, which potentially amounts to billions of dollars in damages, was filed by female employees who worked in Wal-Mart’s 3,400 stores across the United States from 1998. Plaintiffs complained that the company has been discriminating against female workers.

continue reading…

EMPLOYMENT LAW: The Effect of Arizona Law on Discrimination Issues

No Comments

The US Supreme Court has recently voted 5-3 (Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting) which upheld an Arizona law that penalizes employers who “unknowingly” hires unauthorized foreign workers.

According to the High Court, the federal immigration law “does not pre-empt the Arizona statute”, specifically the Legal Arizona Workers Act which says that “the state can revoke the licenses of businesses that intentionally hire illegal aliens”. In addition to this, the Court also upheld the provision requiring companies to use the federal E-Verify system to check the immigration status of job applicants.

continue reading…

Older Entries