Anti-Discrimination Laws in the United States - Research Paper Example

? Since 1964, when the Civil Rights Act was passed, a range of legislation has ensued to address discrimination in the workplace. These provisions may have been effective in improving HR policies and reducing the incidence of overt discrimination in the workplace, so that individuals who are disadvantaged in one way or the other as compared to the majority, also gain access to the workplace and fairness therein. This report examines the impact of such legislation and the effect it has had in terms of improving equality and fairness in the workplace. Anti discrimination laws in the United States The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was one of the most significant pieces of legislation in the employment arena, seeking to address inequality and discrimination in the workplace, by instituting legal provisions to provide redress for those who were victims of such discriminatory practices. In later years, the scope of anti discrimination law has been extended to include discrimination in the workplace against individuals other than black Americans. This report discusses the relevant legislation that has been implemented and the impact that they have had in terms of influencing the human resources process at organizations in the United States. Some of the legislation introduced in the United States to tackle the issue of discrimination in the workplace include: (a) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in employment based upon age, racial background, colour, sexual orientation or nationality (b) The civil rights Act of 1991, one of the provisions of which is to provide for monetary damages for those individuals who have been intentionally discriminated against. (c) Equal Pay Act of 1963, wherein men and women who perform substantially the same level of work are to be provided with equal pay (d) ADEA OR the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which protects those individuals who are aged 40 years or over from being denied work opportunities or promotions (e) ADA or Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (as amended) in which Title I and V prohibits discriminating individuals who are disabled from employment in the private sector, local or state governments (f) The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the equivalent Act to the ADA for individuals with disabilities in the Federal Government, under Sections 501 and 505. (g) The Genetic Information Non discrimination Act of 2008, which under Tiitle II, does not allow discrimination against an employee, former employee or ob applicant on the basis of genetic information about the candidate that may be available. Anti discrimination employment laws have produced a significant impact in terms of making the employment arena a much more equitable playing field for those individuals who are from minority backgrounds or who are disadvantaged in some way compared to the average applicant, i.e, through disability, sexual orientation, religious background or other factors. Burnstein and Edwards (1994) examined the impact of employment anti-discrimination laws on the relative earnings of blacks and whites. As these authors indicate early on in their article, citing the views of Gunnar Myrdal, in 1944, the American Blacks were in a wretched position in terms of employment, they were mostly destitute and poor, living in segregated slums. The anti discrimination legislation however, provided an opportunity for blacks to apply for positions that were earlier not accessible to them, such as jobs in public sector enterprises and educational opportunities. Secondly, the legislation provided them an opportunity to seek redress through the courts and by approaching the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission if they were not paid on an equitable basis in comparison with whites. As Burnstein and Edwards (1994) have pointed out, the most significant impact of the anti discrimination legislation has been the improvement in the relative earnings levels between blacks and whites.(Burnstein and Edwards., 1994, p. 82). Collins (2003) has also examined the impact of anti discrimination laws upon black Americans, by gathering data on the labour market in the United States between 1940 to 1960, prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The author examines the impact of anti discrimination legislation upon black workers’ unemployment, relative income, labour force participation, migration, occupational and industrial distributions. On the basis of the data collected, the author concludes that the fair employment laws adopted in the 1940s in the non-Southern states have been more effective than those in the 1950s and the laws have shown a smaller impact and effect of labour market outcomes of black men rather than those of black women. Demuijnck (2009) has examined how anti discrimination measures are changing human resource practices in firms and how this influences ethics and the progression of a nation towards democracy. He has pointed out that as recently as 2004, a study on hiring practices that was carried out in France, using fictitious applicants with qualifications similar to white Frenchmen in every respect except for possessing North African names, revealed that North African candidates received three times fewer invitations for interview as compared to the white candidates. Another significant findings was that discrimination against North Africans did not go down even when there were fewer applicants (Demuijnck., 2009, p. 88). This author argues that despite the existence of anti discrimination legislation, such as the U.S. Presidential affirmative action orders with a compulsory quota system for some categories of firms, the gap between formal equality in employment and the actual, substantial equality in employment remains huge, not only in Europe but also in the United States and elsewhere. On this basis, the impact of anti discrimination legislation has been limited, thereby indicating that formal measures and punitive action are only effective to a limited extent. The possible reasons for such limitations in achieving the goals of anti discrimination legislation have been pointed out by Labey (2008), who has examined statistics of employment of 50 plus Americans pursuant to the passage of the ADA. Her findings showed that after the enforcement of the 1968 Age Discrimination in Employment Act, whereby filing a discrimination claim became easier in some states, the actual hiring of older candidates reduced; for example, white male workers over the age of 50 in those states were 0.2% less likely to be hired as compared to States that did not have such laws. They were also more likely to report that they were not in the labour force, were retired and worked less number of weeks per year. As Labey (2008) concludes, the findings in her study pertain specifically to white males over the age of 50, because other minorities , women and disabled people can file under different legal provisions, while white males have ADA as their only option. For the lower wage workers the reduction in employment was not statistically significant, but Labey (2008) noticed this slight statistical significance only in the case of white males over the age of 50 years. This finding suggests that the anti discrimination legislation might have actually had a regressive effect on HR departments’ hiring policies; i.e, they prefer to avoid hiring older workers or offer retirement incentives to older workers in order to protect themselves against legal action for discrimination. The differences noted between lower wage and higher wage occupations in this study and the higher incidence of better paying jobs having a lower percentage of older workers could be because workers in such jobs can gain higher level of damages when they take legal action. The anti discrimination legislation and the existence and actions of the EEOC have impacted significantly upon the work arena in the United States, by making employers more vigilant in their hiring practices and more sensitive to overt discrimination. There is a greater emphasis on maintaining paperwork on the race, nationality, sexual orientation and religion of all applicants, so that the organizations can demonstrate receipt and consideration of applications from individuals from various backgrounds. HR policies within firms have also changed to reflect the new working environment that is geared towards equality. Conclusions: On the basis of the above, it may be noted that contradictory evidence exists on the efficacy of anti discrimination legislation. Undoubtedly, some improvements have occurred and the position of black Americans in particular is much improved after the passage of the Civil Rights Act. Overt discrimination in the workplace against individuals with any kind of handicap is not as common in the workplace as it used to be fore, so it may be inferred that HR practices at organizations have improved to allow more equality in the workplace. It is also evident however, that the existence of such legislation could have also had a regressive effect, i.e, it has made employers reluctant to become involved in lawsuits where they have to make high payouts to individuals who allege discrimination or harassment in the workplace. In actual practice, they would need to treat individuals who are protected under various anti-discrimination laws with kid gloves , while white Americans could be adjudged purely on the basis of merit and performance without the fear of legal reprisal, unless they are over the age of 50 and protected by the Age Discrimination Act. In order to avoid facing legal consequences, most firms may simply opt to hire less applicants from the various groups of individuals who are handicapped in one way or the other. Hence, in this way, anti discrimination legislation may be producing a subtle repressive effect on the actual goals of equality and fairness for these groups that is sought to be achieved. These results are especially significant, because the studies cited in this report which indicate such a tendency in law firms are dated in recent years. References: Burnstein, Paul and Edwards, Mark Evan (1994). The Impact of Employment discrimination litigation on racial disparity in earnings: Evidence and Unresolved issues. Law and Society review, 28(1), 79-112 Collins, William, J. (2003). The Labour market impact of state-level anti-discrimination laws. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 56(2), 244-272. Demuinck, Geert .(2009). Non discrimination in Human resources management as a moral obligation. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 83-101. Lahey, Joanna. (2008).State age protection laws and the age discrimination in employment Act. Journal of Law and Economics, 51(3), 433-460 Read More