Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Oiler/Winn-Dixie Case

Good Essays
598 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Oiler/Winn-Dixie Case
Peter Oiler/Winn-Dixie Peter Oiler’s termination from his job by the Winn-Dixie Corporation was an outright and blatant violation of his employee rights. No company or organization is allowed to discriminate against an individual on the basis of sexual orientation and they are most certainly not allowed to discriminate against an employee due to the way he/she decides to dress. This decision would be akin to firing a woman truck driver for wearing a flannel shirt and a pair of jeans while off-duty; while this would be unheard of, the decision to fire Oiler based on his choice of wardrobe while off the job is absurd and completely unfounded. Oiler had a spotless record during his numerous years working for Winn-Dixie; he was basically the perfect employee and to violate an individual’s employee rights and invade his privacy as the company did exhibits a degree of narrow-mindedness and bigotry which is reminiscent of the Dark Ages. It would be easier to understand this decision, if Oiler had been dressing this way on the job due to the fact that numerous organizations must enforce particular dress-codes however; even if this were the case, Oiler would have been given a warning (by most other companies) and offered the chance to “conform” to policies, but the decision to fire him based on his behavior off the job is a major violation of numerous federal and state laws as well as his personal rights.
Organizations which feel as though they have the right to punish workers for off-the-job behaviors run the risk of not only being faced with numerous lawsuits and accusations of prejudice and discriminatory practices, they also face losing customers, business partners and stockholders. While there may be a number of individuals who agree with these actions it is more likely that there will be a greater number of individuals who do not agree and decide to cut their ties with organizations who favor such practices. It would be safe to assume that many businesses who were previously a part of the Winn-Dixie Empire (financial institutions, suppliers etc.) made the decision to no longer be affiliated with a company that would practice such unethical and immoral standards of business. The consequences of such actions have the propensity to ultimately destroy both past and future business relationships and to completely obliterate the potential success of any business or organization.
Any business organization must have rules and regulations which must be adhered to by all employees. Additionally, businesses must have particular methods in place to discipline individuals who do not follow the rules. The “hot-stove” approach punishes all unacceptable behaviors with identical disciplinary actions whereas the “progressive” approach, reprimands individuals depending on the severity and/or the reoccurrence of actions and behaviors which they have previously been warned against. For instance; an organization which uses the “hot-stove” approach may immediately terminate the employment of a worker for being late; the “progressive” approach would initially be used to warn the employee that if the behavior continues harsher actions will be taken. In the Winn-Dixie/Oiler case the “hot-stove” approach of discipline was used. The company did not warn Oiler, or give him a chance to plead his case etc. instead; they terminated his employment with no questions asked. The downfall to this type of discipline method is that does not differentiate between good employees, such as Oiler, and bad employees; each individual is reprimanded with no consideration of how important they may be to the organization.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    I enjoyed reading your post this week, too. I agree with your conclusion, especially “The District Court Judge in the Oiler vs. Winn Dixie case would have had to side with Oiler that he was unlawfully discriminated against and Winn Dixie would have most certainly had to pay Oiler for his monetary losses.” That is very important because both the court’s decision and Winnie-Dixie’s misconduct put Peter Oiler in a bad situation. But, Winnie-Dixie also had a bad reputation by firing Oiler. The company have understood later how they lost their good reputation. The LGBT law eased life for LGBTs.…

    • 102 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The legal case of Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc. is a sex discrimination case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. “Title VII specifically forbids any employer to … discriminate with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment in any way that would deprive any individual of employment opportunity due to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” (Twomey, 2013, p. 397). In this case, Oncale claimed that he was being discriminated against in his workplace because of his sex. In reading the case online, Oncale was “was forcibly subjected to sex-related, humiliating actions against him … in the presence of the rest…

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    This law prohibits employers from discriminating their employees on the basis of religion, race, sex, color, and national origin. Since Mrs. Ledbetter was paid significantly less than her male employees at Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. it is evident that she felt she was a victim of gender discrimination, and thus filed a complaint against Goodyear for violating the Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights…

    • 751 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The facts in the case of Thompson V North American Stainless, LP 562 U.S._ (2011) are fairly straightforward. The petitioner in this case, Eric Thompson, was seemingly fired from his job at North American Stainless (NAS) because his fiancée, Miriam Regalado filed a sexual discrimination charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). His suit was filed under Title VII claiming that his dismissal was retaliation for his fiancée’s charge. (Pagnattaro, Cahoy, Magid, Reed, & Shedd, n.d.)…

    • 567 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Mgmt 520 Week 5 Assignment

    • 1552 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Based on the given facts, she was the subject of jokes in her work place as she was being picked on based on her gender. Since she was the only woman in her department, the male employees subject her to cruel and mean jokes on several occasion when other workers placed a sign on a truck that stated "Hardhat Required/Bra Optional”. This is clearly an illustration that she is working in a hostile environment since the repeated jokes made on her gender has created an intimidating place of work. The case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson is applicable to Pollard where the Supreme Court ruled that hostile work environment sex discrimination is an actionable wrong under Title VII. The fact that the Vice President of the bank made sexual advances against complainant created a hostile work environment and is a form of a sexual harassment covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The severe and pervasive conduct of the vice president who repeated sexually abused on the victim in exchange for sexual favors at the office qualify the acts as punishable under Title VII. Here, the acts of the Teddy’s workers against Pollard constitute Hostile Work Environment (HWE) sexual harassment through the vulgar sexual jokes and…

    • 1552 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Reeves vs Ch Robinson

    • 836 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Facts of the case: Ingrid Reeves, a Transportation Sales Representative files an appeal on the summary judgment in favor if C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. on her hostile work environment sexual harassment claims. Reeves was the only female TSR in the C.H. Robinson Birmingham, Alabama branch office. She worked in a workstation pod cubicle and claims that sexually offensive language permeated the air in her pod daily from the Summer of 2001 to the Spring of 2004. In addition to sexually explicit radio programming she was on one occasion exposed to pornographic images. This behavior continued even after several complaints to her co-workers and supervisors.…

    • 836 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The legal issue in this case is about David Dunlap the plaintiff who has been faced with discrimination on the basis of race in the interview at Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) during the employment process of this company. Mr. Dunlap is an African American man whom has worked for many years as foreman through contract for the union. He has worked as a contractor with the union at Tennessee Authority as a boiler man for over twenty years including fifteen years as a foreman. He has applied for employment at TVA numerous times since 1970 and was not once offered an interview. Mr. Dunlap has established that regardless of experience and during the hiring development, the company has allowed racial favoritism. The court has to recognize if the business is legally responsible under title VII of the civil rights act of 1964 for racial bias with intent. Mr. Dunlap has claimed the case under disparate impact and disparate treatment investigation. (Walsh, 2010)…

    • 1097 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    | Dear Mr. Moore, After reviewing this case, I can state that Teddy’s Supplies is definitely liable for the workplace and sexual harassment against Virginia Pollard. According to the facts, it’s indicated that Ms. Pollard (plaintiff) was placed in a ‘hostile’ environment and Mr. Steve King was her supervisor. Although it is not illegal for 1 woman to work with a group of men, it should be carefully determined by the employer if the environment is suitable for males and females to work together. In this case, it was not a good idea for 1 woman to work with male associates. • Workplace environment can by justified by 7 ways: race, gender, national origin, religious, color, age and disability. In this case, Pollard was constantly being harassed by her male colleagues. They played pranks on her by locking her drawers shut, filling the guard shack with trash, locking her out of the guard shack and therefore she was not able to perform her job duty since she was responsible for watching warehouse inventory. Also, Ms. Pollard was put into unnecessary risk of harm when a coworker backed a forklift up to the guard shack and it backfire into her ear. Ms. Pollard could have sustained injuries if the forklift had hit her because it weighted 3 tons and it could have easily injured her eardrums because it is very loud.…

    • 2218 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 employers are not allowed to discriminate against a potential employee based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. In the Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority case this title of the civil rights act was violated. An African American man named David Dunlap who gave almost the exact same answers as white candidates who got the job and who had 20 years of experience in boiler making was not chosen for any of the 10 positions available with the TVA. The issue is not only that he wasn’t hired but based on the score sheet he was highly discriminated against. When asked how many days he missed Dunlap told the employers that he never missed days unless sick or having a family emergency, two other candidates who just so happened to be white gave almost the exact same answer. On the score sheet for this question Dunlap was given a score of 3.7 while the other two potential employees were given scores of 4.2 and 5.5. Also when he was asked about how many accidents he had in the field he replied none and was given a low score but another candidate whom had at least two accidents was given a higher score than Dunlap. The issue at hand was that, his score sheet was heavily manipulated putting him in number 14 out of the 21 candidates that had applied. The top ten got hired.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    18-3 The dress code used in this scenario was discriminatory. The reason that made it biased was that there were two dress codes for men and women. A dress code that is not discriminatory is one that is same for members of both genders. On the other hand, the motive for the dress code was to distinguish men from women. That act of distinguishing men from women was discriminatory in nature, and it went against the dress code ethics. The motive for distinguishing men from women is not said. Both men and women were doing the same type of job; it, therefore, means that there was no need for distinguishing them. Telling women to wear smocks and men not to wear it was discriminatory in nature. Circumstances that would allow workers to wear different…

    • 298 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Going for the Look Article

    • 1977 Words
    • 8 Pages

    In doing so, some of those companies have been skirting the edges of antidiscrimination laws and provoking a wave of private and government lawsuits. Hiring attractive people is not…

    • 1977 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Federal and state governments have enacted laws to protect against discrimination and sexual harassment in the work place yet employers continue to discriminate and violate employee 's right to work in a non-hostile environment. We have chosen Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Company to examine class action status, discrimination and sexual harassment in the work place. This was the case first sexual harassment lawsuit to receive class action certification in 1988 defining the class “to include: all women who have applied for, or have been employed, in hourly positions...at any time since December 30, 1983” (U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, 1997).…

    • 953 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that protects individuals from discrimination based on religion. Religious discrimination is treating a person differently because of their religious believes. In this case Elaine Mobley, a member of the nonsectarian Unitarian Universalist Church, can file a legal sue under religious discrimination or the Civil Rights Act of 1964, because she was discriminated by employees and her supervisor. They said that she would be “making efforts repeatedly to “save the soul” of a fellow employee” (Neill, 2014, Web). A proven wrongful dismissal will tend to lead to two main remedies: reinstatement of the dismissed employee, and/or monetary compensation for the wrongfully dismissed. In this case the court should look on how Elaine Mobley told her supervisor that she was feeling harassed by her employees, and shortly after that she was fired. In this case the judge should rule in favor of Elaine Mobley, because of what we have of the case it seems that she was being harassed and told her director of division and did nothing but fire her. The employer did in fact discriminate unlawfully, because you cannot force someone to become one of your same religion. It is especially unlawful to leave messages in her desk stating “How can you speak of God and Reject me? I love you and know all about you” as the book stated (Nkomo, Fottler, McAfee, 7 edition, p. 56).…

    • 2010 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Best Essays

    As the country faces transition regarding the topic of sexual orientation, employers are being forced to adopt policies that consider the larger scope of this changing issue. Sexual orientation’s potential status change could affect employers on various levels: from benefits, to discrimination and harassment policies, to training and legal issues. It is at the forefront of current employment law debates and has been gaining more traction as the laws continue to be interpreted in broader senses.…

    • 3283 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Better Essays

    One case that relates to our industry, is when a transgender man K.S, who works at a resort spa as a massage therapist who is in the middle of transitioning from male to female, was requested by his employer to massage a client who requested for male massage therapist. K.S, has reluctantly asked his employer for a new name tag (male to female). But, his employer denied K.S with a new name tag unless K.S obtained a court order name change or gender change on his driver’s license. Under K.S’ rights under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which made it illegal to discriminate based on gender. According to Transgender Law Center Staff Attorney Matt Wood, “Cases like this one are becoming increasingly common and show the significance of TLC’s recent victory in the Macy v. Holder EEOC decision. K.S. lives in a state where there is no explicit state law prohibiting gender identity discrimination in employment. Because of Macy, K.S. was able to show his employer that federal law protects transgender workers and prohibits the company from treating him differently than other men in his workplace. I’m proud we were able to help empower K.S. as well as the more than 2,000 transgender and gender non-conforming people who contact our legal helpline every…

    • 1441 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays