Employment Discrimination - Essay Example

Employment discrimination This article is an analytical discussion of a case of a lady who was sacked after suffering from a medical condition that according to her employer made her unable to deliver her services effectively. This was one side of the case while on the other case after medical checkup she was confirmed fit to work but to do lighter jobs. This two contradicting views created a case that required the use of Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to solve in a court of law. The case of the employee was taken over by the US Equal Employment Opportunity (EEOC) who sued her employer- correct care Solutions for violating the employment rights of persons with disability.

The argument put forward by this commission on behalf of the employee was that the medical disorder she suffered from was classified as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) around January of 2013. This, therefore, provided a basis for valid suing and demand for compensation to the affected person. A close examination of how Cody – the employee was sacked it truly appears to have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act since after she suffered seizures the company required her to go for medical clearance that she complied.

The doctors cleared her and found she would still perform her duties effectively but only under a few restrictions. This should have convinced the organization to let her continue with her job and observe the restrictions provided for in the doctors report. The organization, however, gave her an unpaid leave and went ahead to sack her. The argument of EEOC was in accordance to title 7 if the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which was amended in 2009 to include the recovery of compensatory and punitive damages in cases of intentional violation of Title 7, Americans with Disabilities and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act (EEOC, np).

In my opinion after a close analysis of the case I think the sacking was intentional. This decision is derived from the fact that the organization already had the medical report of the employee before she was relieved of her duties. The report had mentioned clearly the she was in the capacity to continue with her job which the organization ignored and went against. Therefore based on this argument, she deserved to be compensated for the violation of her employment rights. The case also has another side where the company can argue that they are not liable to pay her any compensation because she could not perform her full duties as before.

This loophole is present in the doctors report that mentions a ‘few restrictions if she has to continue with her job. These restrictions are not specified in what manner they would affect her former performance though it is certain that they will. The lack of specification of the few restrictions could provide a loophole for the organization to argue that she was no longer in a position to perform her duties efficiently and hence the decision to sack her was made. This is a case that would require proper scrutiny of how Codys health condition would affect her performance in the job before coming up with the final ruling of whether to compensate her or not.

References U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (1964). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Age Discrimination in Employment.