Weeks vs. Southern Bell - Research Paper Example

? Weeks vs. Southern Bell About the case This case is about the law suit filed by Mrs. Lorena W. Weeks against her employer, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company. Mrs. Weeks who has been an employer of the Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company for about 19 years filed the case against his employer on the charges that her employer has refused her application for the post of switchman as an act of discrimination solely based on sex. Mrs. Weeks have also appealed that her employer, Southern Bell should return the position to Mrs. Weeks along with compensation for damages inflicted for the activities of discrimination of sex. Mrs. Weeks have also appealed for necessary action so that Southern Bell should refrain from such unlawful practices of employment in future. The detailed records of the case indicate that Mrs. Weeks had applied for the post of switchman in South Bell on 17th March, 1966. Southern Bell refused the application of Mrs. Weeks on 18th April, 1966 citing the reason that the position of switchman and the duties and responsibilities associated with the post is not fit for women. Post this refusal, Mrs. Weeks filed an unsworn charge with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission and a representative of the Commission obtained a sworn charge from Mrs. Weeks on 30th July, 1966. The Commission carried out investigations on the charges brought about by Mrs. Weeks on her employer Southern Bell and found there was no scope of judgment looking at the duties and responsibilities of switchman in the company that women are not fit for such positions (Staleup, 2005). On 19th April 1967, Mrs. Weeks was informed by the Commission that the conciliation procedure with Southern Bell has proved to be a failure and that Mrs. Weeks was provided a time period of 30 days to file the case against Southern Bell. The Commission appointed a counsel for Mrs. Weeks who filed the case against Southern Bell on her behalf on 18th May, 1967. In reply to this alleged unlawful practice of sex discrimination in the field employment in context to Mrs. Weeks, the company cross-appealed saying that as per the requirements of the code of law, there was no sworn charge filed by Mrs. Weeks within three months of the alleged unlawful practice. As per the codes of jurisdiction, the refusal of the application for employment occurred on 18th April, 1966 and that the sworn charge should be filed within 90 days, i.e. by 30th July, 1966. The company highlighted that there was error on the part of the District Court to overrule this aspect and based on these points, the company applied for dismissal of the charges filed by Mrs. Weeks against them. The District Court validated the actions of the commission in this case saying that the amendments allow the Commission to charge cases filed beyond the time period of 90 days. The District also emphasized that irrespective of whether its is a sworn charge, any written complaint against the offender or the employer by their employee or the victim that identifies the parties involved in the case and the alleged unlawful practices subject to court’s judgment is deemed to be valid under the codes of jurisdiction. Southern Bell has held the view that that Commission only has the right to receive complaints from the aggrieved parties and take part in the administrative processes and not in any juridical process. Thus the commission has the right to take part in the process of settlement through conciliation, conference, etc. The Commission has no power to enforce juridical matters as it has done through engagement of the counsel on behalf of Mrs. Weeks (Robertson, 2006). In the context of this case, the legislative history is, however, silent on the matter regarding the requirement of the charges to be filed by the aggrieved parties. The charge irrespective of its nature whether it is a written complaint or sworn charge is viewed to be the stimulant that initiates the proceedings against the alleged lawful practices like the case of sex based discrimination of employment practices. The Commission, however, has made it clear that the proceedings of actions like conciliation, discussion and conference on the alleged unlawful practices against the offenders could only be initiated upon receipt of sworn charge filed by the victim (Burstein, 1994). The codes of the sectional jurisdiction have, however, recommended timelines for securing the employers against unfair cases of harassments inflicted by their employees. The District Court in this case referred to the provisions of the amendment in order to initiate the case of Mrs. Weeks against Southern Bell based on the investigations of the Commission. Outcome of the case Conclusively, it can be stated that, Mrs Weeks was turned out from her job by the supervisor of Southern Bell. This is because; according to her superior she might not be able to lift heavy loads (more than 30-34 pounds) in order to perform her works effectively. Due to such reason, she became very upset and decided to make an appeal in the court regarding such issues. Then she made an appeal in the district court but it failed to present positive results. However, by hearing such results she neither became demoralised nor disheartened but remained determined in her ideas. Such inner strength acted as a boon for Mrs Weeks and guided her to meet her desires and demands at the end. After that, she was helped by National Organizations of women and in this time, SylviaRoberts decided to fight her case in the Circuit Court. SylviaRoberts proved quite fruitful for Mrs Weeks as she became able to present back the job of clerk. This is mainly because, the issue on which, Mrs Weeks was suspended seemed either illogical or unreasonable according to Civil Rights Act of 1964. As, there are numerous women in this entire globe travelling from one place to another by carrying kids of more than 30 to 35 pounds every day. So, it is an entirely irrational idea. Hence, such facts helped Mrs Weeks to win the case that forced the organizational management of Southern Bells to get her back in the previous position and remuneration. Not only this, they also had to present her the similar respect and value within other organizational members (Stalcup, 2010). Therefore, from such points it might be revealed that women may not be suspended from any respected position of an organization on the basis of such above mentioned issues. Hence, the organization of Southern Bells lost the case filed against Mrs Weeks and had to handover the similar responsibilities and respect of that position. Hence, from the above mentioned points, it might be discovered that men and women may not be distinguished on the basis of sex discrimantion acts. This is because; it is entirely irrational according to the civil rights act of 1964. And so, the judgement presented by the employer against the employee is totally invalid and unlawful. Due to which, the judgements given by the judges of the court was entirely in favor of Mrs Weeks and against Southern Bells (Diane Publishing Company, 1996). So, after many years of appeal in many courts, ultimately she won the case in the year 1969 and again became the switchman of the organization of Southern Bells and remained in that position till her retirement. Thus, it helped Mrs Weeks to regain her determination power and inner strength that enhanced her level of performance and devotion as well. Side by side, the level of confidence of Mrs Week over the law and order of the country also became stronger and better in all respects. This means, that if a person is right in her deeds then, almity also helps that person. The same thing is seen in the case of Mrs Weeks and Southern Bells. References Burstein, P. (1994). Equal Employment Opportunity: Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy. USA: Transaction Publishers. Diane Publishing Company. (1996). Equal Employment Opportunity: Women and Minority Representation at Interior, Agriculture, Navy and State.USA: DIANE Publishing. Robertson, R. E. (2006). Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Actions Taken But Agency Restructuring Efforts Could Benefit from a More Systematic Consideration of Advisory Panel's Recommendations. USA: DIANE Publishing. Stalcup, G. (2010). Equal Employment Opportunity: Pilot Projects Could Help Test Solutions to long-standing concerns with the EEO complaint process. USA: DIANE Publishing. Staleup, G. H. (2005). Equal Employment Opportunity: The Policy Framework in the Federal Workplace and the Roles of EEOC and OPM. USA: DIANE Publishing. Read More