Florida and Federal Discrimination laws were put in place to prevent discrimination based on race, religion, sex, national origin, physical disability, and age by employers. Discrimination includes bias in hiring, promotion, termination, job assignment, compensation, and various types of harassment in the state of Florida. It is unlawful for supervisors or managers in the workplace to make employment related decisions based on stereotypical assumptions about individuals of a particular national origin, race and/or color or for any employee to engage in bias motivated conduct that creates a hostile work environment for anyone. All this can be found in Chapter 760 of the Florida Statue and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The United States of America is known for being a nation of immigrants, but history shows that at one point our Nation officially practiced national origin discrimination in the form of legislation such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1881, and immigration quotas enacted in the 1920’s where employers adopted policies discouraging applicants based on their country of origin. One of the justifications for these legislations was that some cultures were not capable to adapt into a predominately white, northern European society.
At times when jobs were scarce, national origin discrimination was based on the protection of jobs for native born Americans. After much search I was able to locate a discrimination employment suit based on national origin and race filled by the EEOC’s suit, Case # 8:02-CV-1769-T-30 MAP, filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, alleging that a naturalized American citizen of Palestinian descent was singled out and discharged within days of the 9/11 attacks for no other reason than his national origin. The suit was against Chromalloy Castings Tampa Corporation, a manufacturer of precision investment castings for the aerospace industry. The EEOC’s Miami District Office was heavily involve in this case and stated that “For any employee to lose a job on the sole basis of his or her national origin in unacceptable” and this suit is one of the first filed by the agency nationwide after 9/11 alleging that an employee was unlawfully discriminated against as a direct result of the September 11th attacks on the United States. The EEOC reports that since 9/11, they have seen an increase of intolerance in the work place towards individuals who are, or are perceived to be, Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern. This Person was a Palestinian born in Israel but moved to the United States as a kid with his parents and became a naturalized American citizen. This persona was a manufacturer of precision investment castings for both commercial and military applications serving the aerospace industry, he was fired from his job eight days after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Prior to his termination and immediately after the terrorist attacks, this person was made a target of hostility by his angry coworkers because of his Palestinian origin.
The Term Paper on Fuzzy Logic-Based State-of-Charge Meter
Design and implementation of a fuzzy logic-based state-of-charge meter for Li-ion batteries used in portable defibrillators Abstract A fuzzy logic-based state-of-charge meter is being developed for Li-ion batteries for potential use in portable defibrillators. ac impedance and voltage recovery measurements have been made which are used as the input parameters for the fuzzy logic model. The load ...
It appears that his Co-workers openly expressed their dislike of Middle Easterners, while others reported to their Human Resource Manager that this person had made threatening and inflammatory remarks at work in support of the terrorist attacks, this was even reported to the FBI who interviewed this person and took no further action. Three days after the 9/11 attacks, the HR Manager for Chromalloy Castings Tampa Corporation suspended this person with full pay and benefits pending an investigation of the allegations. Further investigation was inconclusive and soon after his return to work, he was allegedly fired because of attendance problems but further investigations shows that all absences were excused and that non-Palestinian employees with worse attendance records were not terminated and even his supervisors and co-woekers testified that he was a good performer and saw no reason for discharge. Case was later settled and company agreed to pay y $49,000 in compensatory damages and $3,000 in lost wages to the charging party. In addition, defendant agrees to provide a positive job reference, and to remove from his personnel file any reference to pro-terrorist remarks he allegedly made or to his September 2001 discharge. So the questions is what is an employer to do to avoid this type of issue from arising in the work place? The company must have clear anti-discrimination policies and procedures, distribute and require training and education based on those clear policies and procedures for new Managers/ Supervisor and all employees. The company should promptly correct and undertake other remedies when allegations of discrimination are made. If cases go to trial, it seems that juries and courts are mostly interested in how the employer reacts and investigates initial complains.
The Research paper on Affinity Orientation Discrimination Cases Study
Imagine that you are a department manager and you find out that a man you work with has become a woman, or you find out a woman you work with enjoys the private company of woman, would these concepts cause you to discriminate against your employees in the workplace? Analysis of case studies, understanding applicable laws, and recommending clearly defined policies for the workplace will assist with ...
The EEOC has reported an increase in such cases post 9/11 but they have made a firm commitment to figth companies whose actions are not within status and laws placed to protect possible discrimination cases. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination based on race, colour, religion, sex and national origin. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 amended several sections of Title VII. Section 703 (a)(1) of Title VII provides that it shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer : ‘to fail to hire or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to … terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, religion, color, national origin or sex .’ Civil Rights Act of 1964 References: http://www.eeoc.gov/press/9-30-02-e.html http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/ http://www.ago.state.ma.us/sp.cfm?pageid=1950 http://www.law.stetson.edu/courses/empdis/partIII. htm http://www.sgglaw.com/employmentdiscrimination.htm l http://fchr.state.fl.us/complaint.htm http://www.mobar.org/journal/2004/julaug/cavanaugh .htm.
The Essay on The age discrimination in employment act
Part 1625 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29, Chapter XIV is the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) specifies that it is unlawful for a covered employer to discriminate in "hiring or in any other way by giving preference because of age between individuals 40 and over." Essentially this act forbids firing, refusing to hire or to promote, or treating an individual differently ...
