Zimpfer v Palm Beach County - Case Study Example

? Human Resource Case Studies Human Resource Case Studies Zimpfer v. Palm Beach County Was Mr. Zimpfer was a victim ofillegal age discrimination according to ADEA? Why/not? Zimpfer was discriminated against on the basis of age according to ADEA, which was enacted to protect employees above 40 years of age. The act protects individuals performing their jobs satisfactorily against discrimination by employers hiring 20 or more workers and labor organizations with 25 or more members. Zimpfer was 52 years old and, therefore, was under the protection of ADEA and should have been employed instead of the 33 years old Brad. The act requires an individual to perform his or her job satisfactorily, and Zimpfer was an employee for over 16 years. 2. In the same year that Zimpfer was rejected, Palm Beach County filled only 4 percent of managerial positions with persons over 55 years of age and only 16 percent with persons over 39. Do these data indicate illegal discrimination using disparate impact theory? Should Zimpfer’s lawyer use disparate impact theory for his claim of age discrimination? The disparate impact guards against employment practices that can be considered illegal and discriminatory to members of a minority group. The employment practices may not be discriminatory on its face, but has discriminatory effects or application (Bernardin and Russell, 2013). In the above case, 84 percent of the employees are below 49 years of age. This makes the employees over 39 years a minority group. This data can serve as an indication of discrimination of a minority group on the basis of age. Zimpfer’s lawyers can use disparate impact theory as a claim for his employment due to age discrimination. The hiring of only 16 percent employees over 39 years shows the management was discriminative towards older people. This can be used to explain why Brad was hired instead of Zimpfer. Goebel et al. v. Frank Clothiers 3. Were Mr. Goebel and other African-American applicants victims of racial discrimination because of the hiring policies of Frank Clothiers? Is there evidence of disparate impact against African Americans in the decisions that were made? On what basis did you arrive at this position? (Be explicit and show your math.) The company hired 10 African-Americans for the managerial vacancies, which was about 62 percent of the hired employees. The case was filed because 26 African-Americans out of 51 applicants failed the intelligence test and could not be given an interview. The company employed 38 percent whites out of the 16 applicants who qualified for the job. Therefore, the African-Americans were not victims of racial discrimination since the results of the intelligence test were used to choose those who would attend the interviews. The Africans had the constituted the highest number of those employed, which indicates that they were not discriminated against. Disparate action affects employees who are discriminated against because they are a minority group. In this case, there is no evidence of disparate impact since the company did not discriminate against the African-Americans. 4. Gordon Howe, a Caucasian male, scored 48 on the WPT and was interviewed but not hired. Does Mr. Howe have a possible Title VII lawsuit? What additional data are relevant to this question? Can “disparate impact” theory be used in cases involving subjective selection processes like interviews? Title VII protects against discrimination of employees on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or nationality. Howe can use Title VII in a lawsuit because he is a Caucasian looking for employment in America. The employer might have discriminated against him due to his race and settled for another employee. The disparate impact guards against discriminatory acts towards a minority group. Caucasians are minorities in America and Howe could have been discriminated against since he was Caucasian (Bernardin and Russell, 2013). Jones v. Purple Cabs (Reverse Discrimination or Legal Affirmative Action?) 5. What position do you support (A or B)? What is the basis of your answer? Be specific and use correct/appropriate terminology from your readings. The court should rule in favor of Jones (case B) instead of favoring the company. Title VII prohibits discrimination of employees on the due to race, religion, color, sex, or country of origin. Title VII covers employers with fifteen or more employees for each working day in 20 or more calendar weeks of the current year or preceding year. The title allows employers to discriminate employees in special occasions where the trait is bona fide. Purple Cabs has over 200 employees, which is a requirement for Title VII to be applicable. During the second interview, a male panel member described Harrison as a skirt-wearing trouble maker. This means that Harrison was discriminated on the basis of sex. The company had enacted an affirmative action and women could apply for skilled positions in the company. This means that Harrison was discriminated against due to her gender and Jones was a victim of reverse discrimination. Hiring a Bank Teller 6. Does Anna have a case here? What are the critical variables? Anna has a case in since she has several years of experience in two jobs as a cashier and a concierge. The management at the cafeteria had high regards for her, and she could speak both English and Spanish frequently. These were required qualifications for the job, which she had already met. Her disability is the only reason she was disqualified by Dave, who lacked an understanding of her physical state. The most critical variables for Anna are the use of the wheel chair, suffering from multiple sclerosis, qualifications, need for accommodations, and her rights under ADA law. The important variables for Dave are more expenses for reasonable accommodation, adherence to ADA law, and understanding her disabilities. Performance Appraisal at Darby Gas & Light 7. What revisions to the rating form would you suggest? What particular methods discussed in chapter 7 do you recommend and why? Do you recommend the same methods for all Darby jobs? The company uses the Adjective Rating Scale Appraisal Method that has a quantitative analysis for use during comparison. This method does not provide deep information about a particular facet. The rating scale should mention the required skill levels to make it more comprehensive, instead of using numbers. The scale should also include a continuum of classification of different job mastery levels. Each facet should be accompanied by an explanatory note describing its desired interpretation. These notes should have the information necessary for a satisfactory job performance. The form also requires additional dimensions such as quality of work, acceptance of responsibility, judgment, initiative, and determination. The appraisal should have a section for employee self evaluation on the basis of skills, training courses, experience and so forth. The company can incorporate several appraisal methods to improve its evaluation scheme. Graphic rating consists of several rating forms that can be used for different jobs. The essay evaluation method can also be used since supervisors provide information describing strengths and weaknesses of employees. A weighted checklist is drafted by someone familiar with the job. It contains descriptions of effective and ineffective practices in the job that can be used by a rater. A paired comparison analysis contains a range of options that are used by a rater during evaluation. These options can be used by different evaluators in different jobs. In a critical incident method, the manager writes down positive and negative performance employee behavior during a given period. The manager rates all employees eliminating biasness when different raters are involved. The organization can use the above evaluation methods for all jobs. These methods can be used by a wide range of raters, which makes them applicable across the company (Kreitner and Kinicki, 2013). References Bernardin, H. J. and Russell, J. E. A. 2013. Human Resource Management (6th. Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Kreitner, R., and Kinicki, A. 2013. Organizational Behavior (10th. Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Read More