The Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects individuals against employment discrimination on the bases of color, as well as national origin, sex, religion. This law applies to any employers with 15 or more employees including the local state, government, employment agencies, labor organizations and federal government jobs.…
Ms. Riyadh believes she is being discriminated against for religious beliefs and gender discrimination. In this Title VII discrimination case Ms. Riyadh will have to establish a Prima Facie Case proving religious and gender or sex discrimination. The company (ABC) will have the burden of proof of proving their failure to promote Ms. Riyadh to a higher position is not related to her religion or her sex. Ms. Riyadh has to prove she was intentionally discriminated against due to said reasons.…
On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, at 0504 hours, Lieutenant Dana Jackson, Sergeant James Lesher, and I made contact with Officer Dennis Hutchins and his attorney, William “Bill” James in the Homicide conference room located at the 12th Street Substation. Officer Hutchins was one of two first responding officers to arrive at 514 E. 8th, where an officer involved shooting occurred. Sergeant Lesher advised Officer Hutchins of his Miranda Rights and his counsel Mr. James and I signed the form as witnesses. Officer Hutchins waived his Miranda Rights and provided a statement in reference to the incident that occurred at 514 E. 8th Street.…
The murder case of Hae Min Lee is full of unanswered questions. Adnan Syed, 17 at the time of the murder is now a 36-year-old man who had the potential to make a difference in our world. However, his peers betrayed him and he was falsely convicted of the murder of his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, which led to several trials. There have been unproven testimonies and possible alibies, but none that add up to a clear and concise answer. Although there is evidence from both sides proclaiming Adnan’s guilt and innocence; from what I have gathered, this case can only lead to his innocence. Personally, I believe Adnan is innocent because there’s not enough substantial evidence to prove that he is guilty.…
Adnan Syed perceived as a murderer and a menace , is he really to blame for the death of Hae Min Lee? It’s believable that the Baltimore Police Department had no idea who really killed Hae Min Lee therefore they jumped at the first lead they received . In all honesty what police department would like a murder case to be left unsolved,the answer is none. It not only looks bad on the police department but shows faults within the justice system of Massachusetts and their failing to solve the case. To conclude it’s believable that Adnan Syed is in fact not guilty of the murder of Hae Min Lee but is being perceived as guilty by others who testify against him.…
Did the Title VII section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (updated in 1991) go far enough and provide adequate protection for the U.S. workforce? For the vast majority of states, the answer is a resounding yes; most states defer to the federal legislation for employment-related discrimination laws. There are, however, a handful of states that have enacted their own versions of Title VII; in doing so, they are effectively saying that no, Title VII does not meet the needs of our state. One state that has enacted its own form of employment discrimination laws is Florida; in 1992, the Florida Legislature passed the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992. Section 760.10 specifically addresses many of the same issues covered by Title VII protections. What is the same, and what is different, between the two Acts? This paper will summarize the two sets of laws, describe the similarities, and detail the distinct differences between Title VI, the federal law, and Section 760.10 of the Florida law.…
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)…
democracy and freedom for now. It’s something citizen’s want in the future. The economy is a…
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.…
Before Ms Becky and Ms Kassidy presented the final curriculum document at the next site meeting committee, Ms Beckel informed, Ms. Wright, one of her neighbors about the religious studies curriculum which included the bible as one of the texts that the school was going to implement.…
According to Bennett-Alexander & Hartman (2015) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “prohibits discrimination in hiring, firing, training, promotion, discipline, and other workplace decisions on the basis of employee or applicant’s race, color, gender, national origin, or religion” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015, p. 111). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 have been extended to Title VII’s coverage to U.S. Citizens employed by American employers outside of the United States (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015).…
Cameron, C. (1997) How the garcia cousins lost their accents: Understanding the language of title VII decisions approving english-only rules as the product of racial dualism, latino invisibility, and legal indeterminacy. California law review. 85(5).…
Yes, it is clear to me how and why the judge was able to include those who were not specificity directed by the company’s actions to be included in the outcome of the ruling. Title VII was put in place to help protect minorities in the workplace and those in search of employment. This Act which was passed in 1964, prohibits discriminations in regards to the process of hiring, firing, and training, promoting and disciple along with the advertisement of open positions. This Act also includes any workplace decisions that are based on an employees or an applicant’s race, gender, national origin, or religion. The Title VII Act goes as far as including hiring, pay, and the terms of employment, available training layoffs and benefits. The Local 28 Steel Metal Workers had their hiring and promotion system worded and set up so that only white males would be interested, accepted and feel comfortable in applying for the apprenticeship position along with the ability to move up the union ladder into the union and journeymen position. The goal of the apprenticeship was to find themselves in the local 28 union. This process was set to up to discourage minority’s (specifically black males) from applying. Thus the sheet metal group local 28 was not only in violation of the Title VII Act but also the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), The court system (attempted) to step in to make the sheet metal workers union of local 28 compliant with the (EEOC) and the Title VII Act without success as eighteen years the steel workers were still not compliant with the courts orders.…
Discrimination on any grounds other than an employee's ability to do the job is illegal.…
David Dunlap brought suit under Title VII, alleging racial discrimination by the TVA. The district court found that Dunlap had been subjected to discrimination under both disparate treatment and disparate impact analyses, concluding that TVA’s subjective hiring processes permitted racial bias against both Dunlap and other black applicants (Walsh, 2010). The Appeals Court affirmed the disparate treatment claim, reversed the disparate impact claim, and affirmed the district court’s award of damages and fees to Mr. Dunlap (Walsh, 2010).…
