Discussion questions - Coursework Example

Discriminatory Employment Selection of Learning Discriminatory Employment Selection Would the Canadian charter of rights and freedom prohibit an employer from putting in place a selection system that favored women over men in the hiring process? Could such discrimination ever be justified under the charter?Over the years, the Canadian hiring practices particularly in the public sector has had been subject to high discrimination against women. The situation was different between private and public sectors.

Through the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, the discrimination would be trimmed down. In particular, the Charter would rather encourage employers to put selection system favoring women in the hiring process as an affirmative action in order to boost their participation in national building. This implies that the discrimination could be justified as a mechanism of smoothening out the employment sector on the basis of quotas and proportional presentation in the employment sector (Coral & Practising Law Institute, et al. 2009).2) What are the prohibited grounds for employment discrimination in your province’s or territory’s jurisdiction?

Employment discrimination has often been responsible for enhanced equality in job placements especially in across Canada where inequality is highly integrated. However, discrimination is based upon diverse variables or grounds. Certain grounds are unacceptable while others are mutually accepted. In the Canadian province of Alberta, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited. In particular, either gay or lesbians facing discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation are prohibited from recourse via apt mechanisms laid down in the IRPA enabling them to subject their experiences of discrimination besides incapacitating them to uphold a legal remedy (Koral & Practising Law Institute, et al. 2009). 3) On what ground could a Canadian employer justify the adverse effect of selection procedure, test or other measures?

A Canadian employer may justify the adverse implications of the procedure used in employment selection on several grounds. For instance, according to the Alberta Human Rights Act, there are exemptions to discrimination. This means that some grounds of discrimination are justifiable. In section 7 of the Act, an employer may be justified to discriminate if such discrimination is based on occupational requirement. Subsequently, section 11 justifies discrimination if such action is both ‘reasonable and permissible within the prevailing circumstances’ (Koral & Practising Law Institute, et al. 2009). In this regard, employer’s discriminatory practices demonstrate the fact that their standards do not contravene the law. 4) What does it mean to accommodate someone to the point of undue hardship?

To accommodate an individual to a point of undue hardship basically entails a provision under the Supreme Court of Canada that ensures that employers must accommodate individual needs of employees to a point where such accommodation would rather create an onerous situation for the employer or service providing agent (Koral & Practising Law Institute, et al. 2009). Such conditions may include unfavorable financial costs or business disruption. 5) When can an apparently discriminatory selection practice be justified on the grounds of ‘sufficient risks’?

Discriminatory selection practices may be justified in situations deemed to have potentially significant risks. Basically, discrimination by an employer may be based on the application of specific company policies which appears neutral in effect but have a real negative impact on one group relative to another. For instance, in the face that an employer advertises a certain language or even asserts that a certain job requires certain stringent qualification, the impact would be that members of certain group may be incapable of applying for such position.

In such circumstances, employers must be able to justify their ‘discriminatory’ practice with the intention of mitigating potential risks defined by job requirements (Koral & Practising Law Institute, et al. 2009).6) Why is basing hiring practices on a ‘gut feeling’ risky business? Finally, hiring practices should be based on the understanding of the employee’s past behavior and functional capabilities. Essentially, basing hiring procedures on the person’s current intuitions and probable capacities may deny an employer a chance to gauge the employees future ability and therefore detrimental to the success of the business in future.

Indeed, experts assert that an employee’s past behavior is a prediction of their future performance. Hence, hiring based on ‘gut feeling’ denies the employer a chance to evaluate the probable performance capacity of the employee in future hence raising risk level of the business. ReferencesKoral, A. M., Vladeck, A. C., & Practising Law Institute. (2009). Employment discrimination claims, 2009. New York, N.Y: Practising Law Institute.