Employment Law - ABC Manufacturing Company - Essay Example

Employment Law Employment law seeks to act as a guideline for sound practices by employers and employees in the workenvironment to safeguard them from exploitation and unethical practices. ABC Manufacturing company posses a decentralized human resource (HR) model where each department operates on its own set of HR practices with the head HR manager’s role being as a general overseer. Although a decentralized HR model has its advantages, the decentralized model creates loopholes for the abuse of power bestowed upon department heads by the system. According to a new employee in the HR department, the company faces a couple of challenges with regards to its HR practices in various departments.The most distinct of challenges are discrimination, code of conduct with reference to favoritism and employee relations. These challenges can be addressed using the guidelines set out by the Employment Law. This paper seeks to highlight the use of Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion (IRAC) model of legal analysis. Issue: Ron is a potential candidate for recruitment at ABC Manufacturing Company but the head of the department he might wish to work in is bias against him because he is an amputee. This raises the question whether it is legal to deny such a candidate an employment opportunity due to his incapacitation.Rule: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal government department that is tasked with dealing with employment discrimination claims (Rothstein and Liebman 12). The United States constitution protects the rights of people with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA is enforced by the EEOC, which prohibits public and private employers from discriminating against people based on disability. The precedent set by the case involving Sutton vs. United Airlines Inc. saw the definition of the disability as ‘a physical or mental impairment that significantly limits an individual’s life activities’ (Rothstein and Liebman 18). According to the guidelines stipulated in the act, denial of a job opportunity should be based on merit, professional ability and competence (Rothstein and Liebman 20). Application: The ABC head of HR should consider the implications of these guidelines and legislation, and find an amicable solution to the problem that protects the interests of the company and is satisfactory to the subject. This is because the law clearly states that discrimination based on discrimination is illegal. Having a person who has a part of their arm missing from amputation in a maintenance department would contribute to the department’s inefficiency. Despite this obvious fact, the law that gives them the right of access to gainful employment without bias brought by their disability protects such an individual. Conclusion: Denying individuals an employment opportunity because they are disabled is illegal which is stipulated under ADA.It is arguably clear that Ron can not hold the same position that he held with his former employer because of the obvious incapacities brought by his condition. To avoid a damaging lawsuit against the company, Jim the maintenance department manager can be advised to decline Ron’s application based on other merits. The alternative is to offer Ron a job position that he can competently handle if he is qualified for that position. This will help pacify Ron and avert problems for the company, which could have long lasting and negative implications. Issue: Do Robb’s actions qualify to be regarded as sexual harassment under employment law? In ABC Manufacturing, the head of the comptroller department, Robb, is upset about Betty the purchasing department’s manager for dumping him in order to have a relationship with another employee. Robb contemplates making a complaint against Betty as a way of getting back at her for the dismissal. This raises the question whether this kind of behavior or sentiments towards other employees should be condoned.Rule: Under the EEOC guidelines, it is forbidden to retaliate against a fellow employee based on any feature of employment (Rothstein and Liebman 29). The EEOC further defines it as ‘Quid pro quo harassment to set a hostile environment. This acquires the characteristics where the offending supervisor abuses his authority over employment decisions to force the victim to participate or endure sexual conduct (Rothstein and Liebman 38). The ruling this case set the precedent for the demarcation of the differences that exist in discriminatory circumstances.Application: This was a precedent set by the Meritor Savings vs. Vinson that saw the creation of the second provision defining the hostile environment aspect with relation to conduct. Under the Civil Rights act in employment law, it also falls under the retaliation section of the EEOC laws, which forbid such actions against fellow employees for offenses such as emotional hurt and romantic issues. Robb’s situation is a perfect that encourages and prompts many corporations to ban romantic relationships between employees to avoid such sentiments from developing between employees. Robb’s contemplated action against Betty qualifies as an offense under the EEOC retaliation laws. Conclusion: Under the Hostile Environment provision in Title VII, Robb is clearly on the verge of committing an offense that can be cited by two legislations. The HR should make sure that Robb is aware of the consequences of breaking the two laws. The castigation of degrading statements against a fellow employee for purposes of retaliation is punishable under the law stipulated by the EEOC federal agency. The HR should instigate measures intended at ensuring that Robb does not execute his plan because it would land him in trouble with the law. Issue: Is it an offense to give unfair disadvantage to an individual based on his religious and ethnic background? Betty is the head of the purchasing department at ABC Manufacturing and it is clear that she is committing an offense when she proposes to sideline or offer an unequal wage rise to one member of her department. This is because Saul is a Jew who asks not to work on Jewish holidays. This is an offense because although she claims to give wage raises based on merit and performance, she is already decided on whom to give the lowest or least raise. Rule: This act falls under the adverse impact law (Rothstein and Liebman 41). The adverse impact law prohibits the practice of seemingly neutral practices but have discriminatory undertones against a protected group. This also falls under the Title VII disparate treatment based on his religious and ethnic background (Rothstein and Liebman 36). Application: This law clearly stipulates that the action might be intentional or unintentional, but it still remains an offense to act as such. The best way to deal with this situation is to advise against this action because it could bring unprecedented litigation against the company if discovered. Conclusion: Adverse impact laws are clear on the matter of discrimination because they put these protected groups at a disadvantage. The amicable solution to this situation is to determine whether this has been an ongoing practice or if it is an isolated incident. Whether or not it is an isolated incident, this should not be encouraged and Betty should be reassigned to another department. The situation in ABC Manufacturing Company from a human resource perspective requires urgent reevaluation to ensure that the full potential of its personnel is realized. The decentralized nature of the company’s management of HR issues has its advantages but the few disadvantages that emerge put the respective departments at a huge risk of ineffectiveness (Rothstein and Liebman 82). The decentralized nature of HR management seems to be an entrenched tradition in the company, and this does not have change. To improve the efficacy of HR management in individual departments, the company should employ professional HR managers in each department. Another alternative is to take prospective employees in each department for training to give them knowledge on HR management that is best suited for their respective departments. Professionalism in the management of HR reduces or eliminates incidences of unethical practices in the work place as the one exemplified in the discrimination of Ron because he is disabled. The company should also embark on evaluating their rules and regulations that pertain to employee relations within the company’s precincts. The company should formulate a clear guideline detailing what is allowed and what is not allowed in order to set clear boundaries between employees and their work related relationships. HR professional etiquette should be applied in formulating these standard guidelines to ensure they meet internationally recognized benchmarks (Rothstein and Liebman 56). This will see the company attain higher standards in its daily operations, which will see the company achiever greater customer satisfaction, and the employees will get more from their employment. Work Cited Rothstein, Mark and Lance Liebman. Employment Law, Cases and Materials,7th Concise, 2012. Supplement. 7th Revised Edition. West Group. 2012. Print. Read More