Discrimination in the Work Place - Essay Example

Discrimination in the Work Place Introduction The article en d “Black Steelworker Awarded $25 Million After Years Of Racial Harassment” written by Claire Gordon and published online on the AoL Jobs website on the 14th of June 2012 proffered pertinent issues relative to the legal avenues that must be taken by workers who are being discriminated in the work setting. As disclosed, Elijah Turley, a worker at the Arcelor Mittal steel plant reportedly located in the upstate portion of New York, was repeatedly harassed and discriminated against for being black. The report revealed that “he was a broken man after enduring three years of racist taunts inside the Buffalo-area factory's walls. Earlier this week, a federal jury unanimously awarded him a whopping $25 million as a result” (Gordon par. 1). The discrimination in the work place specifically focuses on race and color discrimination ("Section 15…”). One firmly shares the contention that discrimination in the work setting must be immediately addressed through the proper legal avenues. Issues Discussed The discrimination case that was legally filed in court was a racial harassment lawsuit, which, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), reveals that “racial harassment cases at the EEOC have surged since the early 1990s from 3,075 in Fiscal Year 1991 to nearly 7,000 in FY 2007. In addition to investigating and voluntarily resolving tens of thousands of race discrimination cases out of court, the EEOC has sued more than three dozen employers this decade in racial harassment cases involving nooses” (“Conectiv and Subcontractors…” par. 9). Nooses were reportedly being hanged with a stuffed monkey hanged on it and placed in Turley’s car. Likewise, Gordon also noted that his lawyer, Ryan Mills, openly relayed in court during the trial that “his bosses sat by while his co-workers harassed him, writing "KKK" and "King Kong Lives" on the walls, playing howling animal noises over the loudspeaker, hanging a stuffed monkey with a noose around its neck from his car, and even threatening his life” (Gordon par. 2). Due to the seemingly indifferent stance perpetuated by Turley’s immediate bosses, the amount of compensatory damages was substantially increased. As emphasized by the EEOC, “[e]mployers risk intervention by the EEOC when supervisors ignore racially offensive working conditions and fail to take prompt and effective remedial action to stop it” (“Conectiv and Subcontractors…” par. 4). It was allegedly indicated from Gordon’s discourse that “its executives went to great lengths to stop it, even suspending the guilty employees. Mills said the evidence unequivocally showed "a work environment that went beyond harassment" (Gordon par. 3). From the facts disclosed in the article, it was evident that through a thorough examination rendered from court proceedings, the results and the verdict of awarding a substantial amount in damages to Turley was only enough proof that workers and management at Arcelor Mittal were guilty, as charged. The three years of agony and repeated prejudice and discrimination that Turley endured in the work setting had to be stopped through using the proper avenue to file charges of racial discrimination and harassment. Every organization’s human resources department is well aware of the laws and regulations that promote equal employment opportunities that explicitly discourage discrimination through Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), to wit: This law makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. The law also makes it illegal to retaliate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit. The law also requires that employers reasonably accommodate applicants' and employees' sincerely held religious practices, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer's business. (“Laws Enforced…” par. 1) Observance and adherence to this law is crucial to ensure that the working environment is conducive for productivity and performance to all employees, regardless of age, race, or educational background (Miller; Martires and Fule). Having been discriminated on the basis of race, Turley was subjected to undue stress, anxiety, and even fear, which hampered his ability to perform his responsibilities in the unjust work environment. Since his own supervisors and bosses could not make the other workers stop harassing Turley, it was likewise indicative that the organization does not have an effective set of policies and procedures, as well as a code of ethics, discipline and behavior, which is supported by the EEOC law. The torment and supposed barrage of verbal and behavioral cruelties continued unabated for three years (Gordon). Regrettably, the Civil Rights Act that should have stopped all forms of discrimination was enforced in 1964, which was already 48 years ago – but the discrimination still happens until contemporary times. One is therefore made to reflect on the imposition of damages to organizations that continue to violate this law. If large amounts of compensatory damages have already been awarded to victims like Turley, then, how come situations like this continue to happen? Was the $25million, for instance, that was stipulated as awarded to Turley, solely accountable from the organization? What about the employees who were directly identified to have caused Turley undue and unfair treatment? What were their punishments? If these employees were summarily dismissed, does their dismissal earn learning the lesson that they should never discriminate anymore in their future work settings? The same situation and lawsuit was apparently filed and won in the case where “African American employees who were subjected to egregious racial harassment at a construction site in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania… (where) a major settlement of a racial harassment lawsuit for $1,650,000 and significant remedial relief against Conectiv, A.C. Dellovade, Inc., Steel Suppliers Erectors, Inc. and Matrix Services Industrial Contractors (doing business as Bogan, Inc. /Hake Group)” (“Conectiv and Subcontractor…” par. 1) ensued. So, it just proves that this kind of discrimination continues, and no amount of compensatory or punitive damages that were awarded stops it from happening. Conclusion The current essay has hereby successfully presented details of a racial discrimination situation that was effectively addressed and resolved in contemporary settings. Through the experience of Elijah Turley and other African Americans who continue to be subjected to vast amounts and forms of workplace discrimination, the court could justify rationality of filing charges against employers who apparently remain indifferent or unaffected in violating the EEOC law. One firmly believes that although the legal process could have effectively addressed a number of discrimination cases filed, the unfair, unequal and unjust treatment continues to exist in other facets of contemporary societies. Other more stringent interventions and regulations need to be enforced to ultimately put a stop to these atrocious behaviors. Works Cited "Conectiv and Subcontractors to Pay $1.65 Million to Black Workers Who Were Racially Harassed." U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 5 May 2008. Web. 31 Oct. 2012 Gordon, Claire. "Black Steelworker Awarded $25 Million After Years Of Racial Harassment." AoL Jobs.14 June 2012. Web. 31 Oct. 2012. . "Laws Enforced by EEOC." U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d. Web. 31 Oct. 2012. . Martires, Concepcion, and Galileo Fule. Management of Human Behavior in Organizations. Quezon City: National Bookstore, 2000. Miller, Renee M. "Creating Your Human Resources Road Map." Workforce Solutions. Concho Valley, n.d. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. . "Section 15: Race and Color Discrimination." U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 9 April 2006. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. . Read More