Stereotype Claim on Gender Discrimination - Assignment Example

Case Scenario 1

1. What type of discrimination will MJ base her claim?

MJ would base her stereotype claim on gender discrimination. The reason why she should be able to find such a basis valid is due to the nature of actions that were perpetrated against her person. The terms 'freak' and 'gothic looking, indicate a repulsion by her colleague to recognize a conservative female. The actions taken with regards to MJ would show a lack of recognition as a bona fide woman. The emails that she was sent would have links to women's fashion clothing, which serves that as a direct implication that her code of dressing did not serve as a valid case of femininity. The basis for pursuing a court case would also include creating a hostile working environment where she was subjected to taunts and willful exclusion from attending to her duties as an Associate accountant.

2. What is the likelihood that MJ will succeed? It would be best if you referred to the legal

requirements that MJ would need to establish to be successful.

The probability of success in the case against the employer is less than likely based on several probable reasons. The case has a valid argument based on the emails sent to her, which would indicate that the senders were pressuring her to conform to a gender stereotype. However, the majority of the taunts do not definitively allude to discrimination based on gender. After she complains to the supervisor, there is a clear indication that she was to dress in a manner that showed proper office attire that corresponds to workplace formality. The case can be judged in jurisprudence to the Kay v. Independent Blue Cross of 2003, where the case's outcome was heavily by the action or lack thereof of gender discrimination. There needs to be actual evidence that the plaintiff was accorded punitive measures due to her non-conforming dress code. The plaintiff case lacks definitive action that gives a clear indication of discrimination based on a gender stereotype from the part of the employer. For MJ to succeed in her claims against her employer, she would need to show intentional discrimination and its detrimental effect on her person. Also, she would need to show respondeat superior, which is that the employer is responsible for the circumstances that led to the claim, either through willful action or negligence.

3. Why do you think she will or will not be successful in her lawsuit?

The plaintiff (MJ) is less than likely to succeed in her claims due to the lack of sufficient evidence to indicate that there were punitive measures accorded to her based on gender discrimination. The circumstantial evidence presented on behalf of her case would be the emails to fashion web pages. However, the defendant can counter the claim by moving to have the plaintiff definitively show that the web page links were on account of her non-gender-conforming attire. The web pages had no explicit explanation that would offer the plaintiff was told to dress in a manner that is deemed appropriate for her gender. Based on the Kunin v. Sears case of 1999, it was established that it was the pejorative of the plaintiff in the chance to show 'intentional discrimination on the basis of gender,' which entails having the proof presented to show that there was gender discrimination beyond any reasonable doubt. The supervisor implied that the plaintiff's manner of dressing was to be more' formal to the office.' Even though there is evidence of harassment from MJ's colleagues, there is a need to show a clear basis that the source of harassment was based on gender discrimination.

Case Scenario 2

1.  What type of discrimination claim will Martinez assert?  (Hint – make sure you specify

whether it is disparate impact or treatment and what Title VII category?)

Mr. Martinez can file a claim against Money Movers based on racial discrimination. He was asked to surrender his GMAT scores while other Caucasian candidates were not asked to do so. The action was taken under the instruction of John Moore. MR. Moore was acting on behalf of the company, effecting a discriminative filter of candidates. There is also sufficient evidence to show a consistent pattern of such behavior as five other candidates had been chosen showed a distinctive characteristic of being white in an area that had 70% minority presence.

2. Do you think Martinez will be successful in his lawsuit against Money Makers?

Several aspects would distinctively make Mr. Martinez likely to succeed in his claims. Cases that center on discrimination should reflect the conditions stated in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. There is a particular case to be made based on a racially discriminative system towards Mr. Martinez as a Hispanic. Denial of employment is a clear basis of a detrimental effect that the plaintiff, in this case, Mr. Martinez, was exposed to a policy that seeks to discriminate people based on their race. There is also sufficient evidence to suggest a consistent practice of discrimination, as all five people hired by the investment firm were of the same race.

2. Do you think Martinez will be successful in his lawsuit against Money Makers?

Martinez ma has a high probability of success in the case due to certain key factors. While the investment firm can claim that they were implementing a standard that would serve to verify its potential employees' competence, the policy would definitively shield candidates of the white race from such scrutiny. Having African American and Hispanic candidates surrender their GMAT scores while white students fail to do so is a clear case of discrimination. Despite the outcome of the scrutiny, the case would need to focus on the detrimental effect, which would show that other people of the same race were subjected to the same treatment.

3. Explain why he will or will not succeed?

A discriminative policy that denies an opportunity based on gender underlines an offense that is a critical element of the Title VII conditions. Mr. Martinez was denied employment on such a basis the defendant, in this case, Money Movers, would counter the claim with the fact that the GMAT scores of the defendant served as proof that he was inept during the interview process. However, there is no evidence to show that the successful candidates were subjected to the same scrutiny. There may be a case for the defendant because there is no Caucasian candidate that has been allowed to gain employment despite GMAT scores.

4. Are there any problems with Money Maker’s recruitment methods? If so, explain what the issues are.

The Money Makers' recruitment methods may show several ethical and legal discrepancies that would jeopardize the Title VII labor and employment laws. Disparate treatment of minorities is a clear indicator of a faulty systemic structure. Money Makers show a clear record of disparate treatment, evidenced by its results. Black and Hispanic are subjected to treatment, while Caucasian candidates are privy to such. The structure is discriminative as it shows a lack of ethical diversity in its hierarchical structure as its staff shows no representation of the New Orleans Demography. There is an apparent lack of racial representation. Mr. Martinez should be able to lodge a valid case against an organization that is discriminative towards people of a particular race.

5. If Martinez wins his lawsuit, can the court require Money Maker to alter its hiring practices so that 1 out of every two new hires is a minority for several years?

Suppose Money Makers are found to be guilty of racial discrimination under Title VII act. In that case, the court needs to require that future practice in the investment firm be aligned according to the principles mentioned above. This majorly due to the case showing a disparate act pattern, where a way of discrimination has been meted out to candidates who were minorities. Money Makers would be required to ask every candidate to surrender their GMAT scores.

6. If your answer to "E" is "yes," then explain why the court can do this. If your answer is "no," then explain why the court cannot do this.

The court can implement such a policy to an organization that shows a pattern of discrimination that falls under Title VII act. Affirmative action can be taken in cases where the court has seen a structure or a system that continually discriminates persons based on race. Money Makers has shown a distinctive pattern of racial discrimination in its recruitment process, thereby making the firm a liable for affirmative action.