Legal Issues In Hiring - Research Paper Example

Legal Issues in Hiring Introduction Discrimination in the sector of employment occurs continuously and in different forms. A hiring or employment policy is considered as discriminatory if the policy treats certain individuals differently from other individuals, for example: a policy stating that the organization does not hire female employees is a discriminatory policy (Silvers 80). Such policies are quite rare as these policies clearly show that discrimination is taking place. The nature of discrimination has become quite subtle and impossible to predict and identify, organization try to figure out ways of discriminating a subtle format in order to defend themselves from legal issues. These subtle, intentional/unintentional forms of discriminatory practices may be hard to identify but are equally illegal as compared to discriminatory policies that are easy to identify. There are various rules and regulations created by policy makers and institutions to protect any kind of discrimination from taking place. Body During the period of 1866, Civil Rights Act was formulated by the federal government; this policy is recognized as the first American policy that impacts the staffing side of an organization. The base of this policy is the 13th Amendment which was created to abolish slavery throughout US (Hutchison 42). According to this law, all citizens within the US enjoy similar rights and are free to own property regardless of their color, shape and size. Later during the era of 1968, the coverage of this rule was broadened as the policy makers even covered those people in this policy who had contractual agreements (Hutchison 110). Contractual agreements even include contracts created between the employer and the employee during employment and contract created between unions and the union members, this policy even covers employees and union members. During the period 1963, the policy makers created Equal Pay Act; according to this act an employer should not discriminate while paying wages (Jennings 642). This means that this Act prohibits employers from paying wages to employees on the basis of gender. The Act does not allow the employer from paying less to one gender and higher to another gender if the work they are conducting is similar. Before this Act was enacted, employers used to discriminate among genders by conducting different recruitment practices for females and males. According to the same law, difference in wages is allowed if the work being done is different in accordance to responsibility, working environment, experience. This Act even allows different wages for employees for their performance and productivity. Those employers who do not operate in accordance to the act are heavily penalized by the court, for example: during the period of 2004, Morgan Stanley was held responsible for conducting gender discriminating practices on the side of wages and promotion and had to settle the law suit by paying $54 million (Weiss 403). The law that regulates the current practices of employment regarding discrimination is 1964’s Civil Rights Act under the Title VII (Weiss 373). According to this law, an employer is not allowed to conduct discriminatory practices in the region of hiring, firing, and compensation on the basis of race, gender, culture, and color. Title VII was enacted during the period of equal employment opportunity and the civil rights and this Amendment is to date considered as the most remarkable move made by the policy makers to abolish and to control discriminatory practices in employment. This law developed the theory of protected classes, according to this principle a certain class or individuals are legally protected from practices considered as discriminatory. Those in the favor of this policy state and believe that this law is the best law in the practice of employment because it covers all the forefronts of employment and has left no loop holes which have restricted employers from conducting discriminatory practices. The policy even restricts employers from creating policies that in any way restricts an individual from being employed in a particular organization on a particular position. The features of Title VII are that it restricts employers from conducting activities considered as discriminatory on the basis of race, sex and color, it promotes the notion of equal employment rights, promotes training for all employees, restricts activities recognized as sexually harassing, restricts employers from conducting discriminatory activities on the basis of pregnancy, abolishes discriminatory operations in the region of compensation, restrict employers from negatively treating employees who raise their voice against discriminatory practices and led to the creation of the commission of Equal Employment Opportunity. This law is to be followed by all those organizations that have 15 or 15+ employees working within the organization (Jennings 681). Although this law is not to be followed by companies that have less than 15 employees but there are other laws that provide coverage to employees of organizations that contain less than 15 employees (Jennings 681). This law is not applicable in various working environment such as the firefighting department and the warehousing organization, in such departments and organization, the protected class is not protected by the Title VII. Title VII even allows an employer to conduct discriminatory activities if the job requirements are such that require certain gender and may not allow the employment of another gender, this act is recognized as Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (Jennings 665). Another area in which employers can conduct the practice of discrimination under Title VII is on the basis of experience and seniority. Employment activities conducted in accordance to seniority of individuals may be considered as discriminatory until these activities are verified in accordance to the records of employment. During the era of 1967, the policy makers enacted the Act of Age Discrimination in Employment with the purpose of protecting employees who aged between 40 to 65, later the act was altered and people till the age of 70 were protected under this act and during 1986 this act was again altered and any employee over the age of 40 was protected by this law (Jennings 642). According to this act an individual aging over 40 could not be forced into taking up the option of retiring if he does not wants to retire and is complying with all the requirements of conducting the job for which he was hired or he is working in (Hutchison 200). Organizations that are private as well as the public organization have to comply with this Act. During the period of 1978 an amendment was made to the Title VII which abolished discrimination by employees against pregnant women and those individuals who were experiencing related health conditions (Jennings 680). This law forces the employer to give equal treatment to pregnant individuals as they treat individuals who experience disability for a temporary period. According to this act all pregnant women had a right to be promoted and should not be fired on the basis of their health condition and should not be forced to leave work as long as she has the ability to remain employed and work. This policy does not even allow employers to treat and create different policies for women experiencing child birth as these policies reflect that pregnant women are different from other women who are not pregnant. During the period of 1990, Act regarding Americans with disabilities was passed to protect disabled individuals in the activities of employment (Jennings 665). According to this act, an employer can not conduct the act of not providing employment to an individual on the basis of his health condition if the candidate is fully equipped with KSAs to perform the job he/she has applied for. The act holds that an employer has to provide necessary assistance to the disabled person so he can easily do his job until and unless the expenditure of the assistance is quite heavy for the organization to bear. Conclusion Employers over the years have been conducting discriminatory practices and have been held responsible for such practices and have ended up paying heavy fines for these activities. Even employers, who do not conduct discriminatory activities intentionally, have been held responsible for these activities. If employers conduct employment activities in accordance to the laws and policies create by the government, they can easily avoid discriminatory practices and legal sanctions caused due to such practices. Works Cited Hutchison, Michael, and Kerry Gordonson. Big Ideas in U.s. History. Culver City, CA: Social Studies School Service, 2005. Print. Jennings, Marianne M. Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment. Cincinnati, Ohio: West Legal Studies in Business, 2000. Print. Silvers, Anita, David T. Wasserman, and Mary B. Mahowald. Disability, Difference, Discrimination: Perspectives on Justice in Bioethics and Public Policy. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1998. Print. Weiss, Joseph W. Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach. Mason, Ohio: South-Western/Thomson Learning, 2003. Print. Read More