There are many different views on what actions the government should or should not take against discrimination in the work place. People who want the government to take action want them to put a law in act to give employees the right to sue their employer if they are discriminated against. On the other hand people want the government to just leave it alone and let the issues work themselves out. The views on each side of the issue can be somewhat extreme, while still proving their point. The ideas that both sides of the issue present put the bill under a lot of scrutiny.
Proponents on the issue bring forth valid arguments. One of the first reasons supporters of the new legislation bring up is the reluctance of many people to change. Guynn tells us how Pax Dickinson the chief technology officer at Business Insider was let go because of tweets that were racist, sexist, and homophobic “‘men have made the world such a safe and comfortable place that women now have the time to . . . [complain] about not being considered our equals’” (Gyunn). The supporters are using tweets and statements like this to help prove that without legislation big companies with people like Dickinson in power will not hire people because of their gender or sexuality. Another reason backers of the ENDA have is the fact that women and homosexuals have just as many new and brilliant ideas as straight men. The article “Sexism in Silicon Valley” helps us better understand where the backers of ENDA are coming from “As one of the most vibrant sectors of the U.S. economy, that startling lack of diversity could deal a double blow: greater income inequality in society at large and fewer innovative ideas coming out of the tech industry as it faces rising competition ...
... middle of paper ...
... they are represented. Opponents on the issue bring lots different yet valid arguments.
After all of the research I have done I have gone back and forth on what side of the issue I fall on. I now agree more with the opponents of ENDA because the articles I read have now shown me that even though equality among everyone is important ENDA is not the right way to go about it. ENDA is too drastic for what we need to fight discrimination in this country. What changed my view that I had in the beginning was when I was going through all of the arguments against ENDA and I realized that, even though I am all for equality no matter what the circumstance, it’s too drastic to open our small and large business to thousands of lawsuits. Lastly, everyone should have the same opportunities as the next person but the employment non-discrimination act is not the way to go about it.
The supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment seem to feel sex discrimination laws are simply not enough. The federal laws and regulations contain many loopholes, are inconsistently interpreted and may be repealed outright (NOW 1). Many supporters claim the Equal Rights Amendment is needed "to clarify law for the lower courts, whose decisions still reflect confusion and inconsistency about how to deal with sex discrimination claims (Francis 2). There is a supporting theory argument that "an amendment of equality would absolutely shift the burden away ...
I agree with the ruling because everyone should know that they can report sexual harassment and should report it without fear. The ruling found that employers could be held responsible for the actions of their employees who sexually harassed other employees based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This case insured that employers will hold training sessions on sexual harassment and not just look the other way or laugh off the actions of a particularly aggressive employee who insists on harassing other employees. The ruling provides remedies if employers do not take it seriously. Unfortunately, it has probably become a “boy who cried wolf” accusation, but probably better to be over cautious than under cautious.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed soon after the milestone March on Washington. In the largest march ever held in the United States, people of all races and colors gathered together to show legislature that racism would no longer be acceptable in society. Title VII, the section which deals with discrimination in the workforce is one small part of the larger piece of legislation. Title VII, of the Civil Rights Act, quickly became the most important arbiter of rights under the new law (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2001). The workforce has drastically changed since the passage of the act. Women and minorities are engaged in employment now more than ever. With the passage of Title VII, the door was opened to prohibiting job discrimination and creating fairness in employment (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2001). Soon after, protection against discrimination based on age and disability was provided.
Over the course of the recent past, universities across the U.S. have been faced with decisions on admissions. What was once popular, affirmative action, is now fading with a long past of problems, and new programs are entering into the picture. The University of Dayton and many others are taking actions to improve the standards of their students, regardless of race and background. These new concepts are reflecting higher academic progress, and increase in prestige and national reputation. By basing selection on academic ability and incorporating improved recruiting techniques, the nation would be filled with greater college standards and no use for an old and tiring affirmative action process.
To sum everything up, we as a human race are not perfect, nor will we ever make solutions that will satisfy both side of arguments. One lesson we can learn from this research paper, however, is that everyone should have the ability to fully enjoy their Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendments. Nonetheless, the development of reverse discrimination, the creation of stigma against women and minorities, the buildup of racial tension, and the fact of attempting to solve a racial problem that no longer exist all contributed to the danger of affirmative action. It may be created with good intentions, but certainly not applicable to our society now if all of us wish to be treated equal.
The first legislation I am going to be talking about is the Pay Equity Act. The act was passed in order to restore sex-based wage discrimination in Ontario workplaces. The Equity Act applies to all public sector employees and private. In general the act identifies the rate of pay by comparing payment to female job classes with those paid to male job classes of similar value. In non-unionized workplaces, employers are having the freedom to review the Pay Equity Plan and make recommendations in order to change it. An example of the Pay Equity Act would be if you have a female and male both working as a swampier for an oil field company. They both have the same job responsibilities and work the same hours. If the boss of the company where to pay the male more because he was stronger and in general male and pay the women less that would be a violation. The women would have the right to contact Human Resources and file a complaint against her boss, and get the same rate of pay prior to the male. The Pay equity act in my opinion is important in the workplace because it creates equality and minimizes stereotypes against women in the workplace. You never want to be in a business or visit one that has an awkward atmosphere related to se...
Grant, Jaime M., Lisa A. Mottet, Justin Tanis, Jack Harrison, Jody L. Herman, and Mara Keisling. Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.Washington: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 2011. 158-59.
... based on "race, color, religion, sex or national origin" in employment practices and public places. The bill authorized the Attorney General to file lawsuits to enforce the new law. The law also invalidated state and local laws that required such discrimination.
Ever since the currently Proposed Equal Rights Amendment was created, there has been conflict about weather or not it should be approved. For almost a century, the side that supports the amendment have fought to get it officially put in place. One person writes, “Since 1923, activists have been trying to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, which states, ‘Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex’” (Document B). This provides an example of how the ERA would establish a basic idea with a very simple set of rules and end up making a big difference when
Affirmative action has been the topic of debate for many years. It has been controversial because it has been said to be a form of reverse discrimination. This paper will discuss the purpose behind affirmative action, as well as, its various strengths and weaknesses. Also, this paper will look at the following issues surrounding affirmative action such as the incompetency myth ( are companies hiring less qualified people?), the impact on employment (what has changed in the work place?), the impact on women (how have their lives changed?) and the impact on employment law (what documents back up affirmative action?). Lastly, a discussion of affirmative action on an international scale, and what international documents have to say about the topic. The purpose of this paper is to bring to light all the issues, and then make an educated statement of whether affirmative action is a worthwhile activity or if there is a better solution.
Workplace harassment is a significant violation in the modern work environment. According to the Canadian Human Rights Commission Workplace harassment "involves any unwanted physical or verbal behaviour that offends or humiliates you...Serious one-time incidents can also sometimes be considered harassment." (Canadian Human Rights Commission, 2013) If left uncheck accusations of workplace harassment could potentially put a business in trouble with the regulatory agencies. In the workplace, employees experience sexual, gender, and racial/ethnic harassment. The Ontario Ministry of Labour has developed recommendations and guidance as a way to cut the occurrences of workplace harassment. On the other hand, employers also a responsibility to put
Introduction- Discrimination affects people all over the world. People of all ethnicities and from all different walks of life are influenced in some way by workplace discrimination. "Discrimination" means unequal treatment. One of the most common elements discriminated against is a persons ethnicity, or their race. This is called Racial Discrimination. While there are many federal laws concerning discrimination, most states have enacted laws that prohibit it. These laws may have different remedies than the federal laws and may, in certain circumstances be more favorable than the federal laws.
She Identify that in United States are lacking in baseline protections for transgender employees for discrimination and harassment. Because of this transgender only have few things to rely on, like the use of disability law to advocate for transgender employment protection. Bender- Baird specify that this strategy have two major obstacles. The first one is critism on transgender people as being disable or sick. Second is in federal they excludes transsexual and cross dressing people. Transgender people also rely on demand protection under Title VII of Civil Rights act of 1964. Which protect the workers from discrimination on the basis of sex. Bender- Baird Clearly written the strengths and Weknesses of each approach on this chapter to help the readers to know about the complicated and complex legal thing on the issues. Also in this chapter Bender-baired discussed the importance of equality act in transgender people which is putting a distinct category in discrimination law rather than expanding the Title VII that protecting transgender people through disability law. That fell under the ENDA or what they call Employment Non-Discrimination Act. That address the cases of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees that have been discriminated in work environment because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Work plays an important role in our daily life, it is considered much more huge part of our personal life. During our daily work we make many relationships throughout our career history. Sometimes these relationships become lasting, and sometimes employment discrimination might happen. This relationships that we thought it last could be cut off by the devastation of claims of discriminatory treatment. Discrimination in the workforce has been an issue since the first people of workers in United States in the present day and as well in the past. Some employees were subjected to a harsh working conditions, verbal abuse, denial of advancement,, and many other injustices. There was also the fact that certain employees were being treated differently than other employees.
For example, one issue that has yet to be dealt with is the matter of discrimination in the workplace environment. Currently, it is legal in 34 states for an employer to terminate an employee on the basis of their sexual orientation. Only 21 states and Washington D.C. have laws that disallow discrimination against sexual orientation, and 17 states and the District of Columbia have some type of laws in place concerning discrimination against gender identity. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, “would provide basic protections against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity” (Human Rights Campaign). The act follows basic given civil rights laws granted to every American. The bill has passed the Senate, and now journeys to the House of Representatives for consideration, but currently there is only a 14 percent chance of the bill even being ratified. The percent chance is extremely discouraging, not only to people who have experienced discrimination but to civil rights advocates across the country.