1. What is one aspect of Title VII that has been violated by the company? 2. Which actions by the two employees that call their credibility into question are you allowed, as an employer, to consider? Or, what types of actions are you not allowed to use and why? Are there any you wish you could use?
Title VII states that it is an unlawful practice for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Mary has now vowed to not hire ANY while males in her department after Paul made a backhand comment about why they downsized 25% of their white male workforce in order to be more HR compliant. Paul now feels that that was a wrong decision and that they should hire more white males. Also, Mary is guilty of discrimination against Jackie for her sex change and because of her ethnicity. She resents Jackie for filing discrimination charges against her when Jackie opted to get a sex change. Mary constantly tried to convince Jackie not to go through with the surgery, and lobbied against the company paying for it. She personally didn’t believe in the gender re-assignment surgery, so she gave Jackie a hard time when she was going through with it and filed complaints that she had missed too much time during her surgery.
The managers will always call into question the fact that Peter has had a known drug problem. (Hence, the reason for the nickname “Puff”). Jackie’s gender reassignment surgery is also something that some employers will call into question if they don’t personally agree with her choice to go from male to female. Peter’s credibility will always be in question because of his past discretions, but shouldn’t because he has passed his recent drug tests. Jackie’s credibility will be in question because people may not trust her character...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document