1. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. Twomey & Jennings BUSINESS LAW Chapter 38 Equal Employment Opportunity Law Chapter 38 Equal Employment Opportunity Law

2. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 2 Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, forbids discrimination on the basis of: –race, –color, –religion, –sex, or –national origin. The EEOC administers the act. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, forbids discrimination on the basis of: –race, –color, –religion, –sex, or –national origin. The EEOC administers the act.

3. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 3 Disparate Treatment Exists where employer treats some individuals less favorably than others because of their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Proof of the employer’s discriminatory motive is essential. Exists where employer treats some individuals less favorably than others because of their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Proof of the employer’s discriminatory motive is essential.

4. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 4 Disparate Impact Employment practices that make no reference to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, but have an adverse effect on the protected group. –The employer must show that there is a job-related business necessity for the practice in question. –Lack of intent is not a defense. Employment practices that make no reference to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, but have an adverse effect on the protected group. –The employer must show that there is a job-related business necessity for the practice in question. –Lack of intent is not a defense. Griggs v Duke Power Co. (1971).

5. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 5 Theories of Discrimination

6. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 6 Title VII Violations If a state EEO agency or the EEOC is not able to resolve the case, the EEOC issues a right-to-sue letter that enables the person claiming a Title VII violation to sue in a federal district court. Pollard v E. I. Dupont de Nemours & Co. (2001) Is “front pay” subject to a cap on damages?

7. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 7 Title VII Violations An affirmative action plan is legal under Title VII provided there is a voluntary “plan” justified as a remedial measure and provided it does not unnecessarily hinder the interests of whites.

8. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 8 Protected Classes and Exceptions Race and Color. Religion. Sex. Sexual Harassment (employer’s may be vicariously liable for supervisors). –Quid Pro Quo cases. –Hostile Work Environment. –Non-supervisors Race and Color. Religion. Sex. Sexual Harassment (employer’s may be vicariously liable for supervisors). –Quid Pro Quo cases. –Hostile Work Environment. –Non-supervisors

9. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 9 Protected Classes and Exceptions National Origin. –Lack of English Language. National Origin. –Lack of English Language. Fragante v City and County of Honolulu. (1989) Why was the Plaintiff’s complaint dismissed?

10. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 10 ExceptionsExceptions Employers have several defenses they may raise in a Title VII case to explain differences in employment conditions. –(1) bona fide occupational qualifications reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the business, Employers have several defenses they may raise in a Title VII case to explain differences in employment conditions. –(1) bona fide occupational qualifications reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the business, UAW v Johnson Controls (1991) Did the Defendant discriminate against ‘fertile’ women?

11. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 11 Exceptions (cont’d) Employers have several defenses they may raise in a Title VII case to explain differences in employment conditions. –(2) job-related professionally developed ability tests, and –(3) bona fide seniority systems. Employers have several defenses they may raise in a Title VII case to explain differences in employment conditions. –(2) job-related professionally developed ability tests, and –(3) bona fide seniority systems.

12. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 12 Affirmative Action and Reverse Discrimination Employers may have permissible Affirmation Action Plans: –Plan is remedial in nature, voluntary and temporary. Reverse Discrimination. –AAP may discriminate against non-minorities. Employers may have permissible Affirmation Action Plans: –Plan is remedial in nature, voluntary and temporary. Reverse Discrimination. –AAP may discriminate against non-minorities.

13. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 13 Other Equal Opportunity Laws Under the Equal Pay Act (EPA), employers must not pay employees of one gender a lower wage rate than the rate paid to employees of the other gender for substantially equal work. Workers over 40 years old are protected from discrimination by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Under the Equal Pay Act (EPA), employers must not pay employees of one gender a lower wage rate than the rate paid to employees of the other gender for substantially equal work. Workers over 40 years old are protected from discrimination by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Rhodes v Guiberson Oil Tools (1996).

14. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 14 ADAADA The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibit employment discrimination against persons with disabilities. Under the ADA, employers must make reasonable accommodations without undue hardship on them to enable individuals with disabilities to work. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibit employment discrimination against persons with disabilities. Under the ADA, employers must make reasonable accommodations without undue hardship on them to enable individuals with disabilities to work. Sutton v United Airlines (1999) Why was Sutton’s case dismissed?

15. © 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning BUSINESS LAW Twomey Jennings 1 st Ed. 15 Review: Antidiscrimination Laws