Investigation Plan - Assignment Example

Anu. With regards to the questions that should be posed to her, the first of these is what specifically gave her the impression that she was not considered due to her ethnic background/religious views. Accordingly the second question would necessarily be whether or not the employer made any direct or indirect comments, whether legal or illegal with reference to national origin, religion, or any other aspects covered under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Guerin & DelPo, 2009). Similarly, the second stakeholder that should be interviewed by the EEOC is the human resources manager.

Although if this is a small firm, the human resources manager may very well be the same as the general manager, if it is a larger firm, the human resources manager will be a separate position in and of itself. The reason for this individual being chosen is due to the fact that the EEOC will need to determine the level and extent to which compliance with an appreciation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is currently being exhibited within the firm and within the employment process. With regards to the specific questions that the EEOC investigator should ask this individual, these would necessarily be concentric around the questions that are generally asked during an interview process as well whether an offer of employment was made over the phone to Anu.

This second question will have a great deal of importance with regards to the final discussion that will be integrated within this brief analysis; i.e. the proof and understanding of whether or not an offer of employment was made and if it was to what conditions, if any, existed within this offer. The final stakeholder that must that certainly be is the hiring manager was responsible for interview Anu. As a result of the previous, the EEOC investigator will be able to determine based upon the spinal be whether or not Anu ultimately has a case or not (Leonard, 2007).

The first question should be asked to this hiring is how many employees he/she employed at the time that Anu was offered her position stop this is an important but is the answer to that that Civil Rights Act of 1964 only applied to firms with 14 or more employees. If the firm had fewer than 14 employees the time that Anu was offered her position, this negates involvement that the EEOC might be played with regards to get case. Additionally, the hiring manager should be asked whether or not there is any process or work that a potential higher might be responsible for that would require them not to wear a sari.

This last question is due to the fact that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 specifically denotes that an employer can make an exception to the discriminatory clauses elaborated upon in title VII should there be what is known and referred to as a bona fide occupational qualification. As such, if an employee in the bakery is responsible for a job that would require that they not wear loose fitting clothing, this might be understood as a bona fide occupational qualification (Lavin & DiMichele, 2012).

Finally, it should be strongly noted that the exchange upon which Anu was offered the job took place over the phone stop accordingly, there exists no legal proof as to whether any conditions of employment were integrated within the offer was given. By discussing this topic with both the HR manager and the hiring