Diversity Issue Towards Gender Change
Managing a Diverse Workforce- B440
November 30, 2012
Diversity Issue Towards Gender Change
An employee recently went through a major change. Over the course of time, a supervisor, Frank Curry had altered his look, and, then one day, came to work after an operation and was now known as Annie, a female. This change was quite a shocker for the entire company and rumors were going around the work area. This had caused a problem in the workplace towards a diversity issue between the company and employees because of the demographic changes, gender, and cultural differences. For example, other female employees are not comfortable with utilizing the same bathroom as Annie. This could result to harassment or mistreatment on the job, or employment.
I propose that training and educate employees about diversity and to stress a "zero tolerance" against discrimination in the workplace. Managers can encourage change in employee behavior to strengthen the working relationship between men and women, and lead by example. The mission is to promote an equal opportunity in the workplace and enforce the federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.
It began in the 1960s; Americans who knew only the potential of "equal protection of the laws" expected the president, the Congress, and the courts to fulfill the promise of the 14th Amendment. In response, all three branches of the federal government as well as the public debated a fundamental constitutional question: Does the Constitution's prohibition of denying equal protection always ban the use of racial, ethnic or gender criteria in an attempt to bring social justice and social benefits?
According to the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration Web site, in 1964 Congress passed Public Law 88-352 (78 Stat. 241). The provisions of this civil rights act forbade discrimination on the basis of sex as well as race in hiring, promoting, and firing. The word "sex" was added at the last moment. According to the West Encyclopedia of American Law, Representative Howard W. Smith (D-VA) added the word. His critics argued that Smith, a conservative Southern opponent of federal civil rights, did so to kill the entire bill. Smith, however, argued that he had amended the bill in keeping with his support of Alice Paul and the National Women's Party with whom he had been working. Martha W. Griffiths (D-MI) led the effort to keep the word "sex" in the bill. In the final legislation, Section 703 (a) made it unlawful 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 or employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." The final bill also allowed sex to be a consideration when sex is a bona fide occupational qualification for the job. Title VII of the act created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to implement the law. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2011) is the leading federal law enforcement agency dedicated to eradicating employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, pregnancy, age, disability, and family medical history or genetic information. The agency began its work more than 45 years ago and while there have been significant changes in society and the workplace, the public continues to rely on the EEOC to carry out its responsibility to bring justice and equal opportunity to the workplace. The EEOC works with agencies to promote workplace policies and practices that foster an inclusive work culture and prevent employment discrimination. This effort includes working with federal agencies to adopt and successfully implement the attributes of the EEOC’s Model EEO Program.
According to EEOC it is unlawful to harass a person because of a person’s sex....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document