Ann Hopkins was denied a partnership at Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC), a prominent professional services networking firm based in the United States, in 1982 (Badaracco, 1). She later sued the company for discriminatory promotion practices due to her loss. While the Supreme Court ruled that Ann Hopkins was indeed discriminated against the promotion, there can be arguments made for and against the view that Ann Hopkins was subject to discrimination during the assessment process. The case can be made that Hopkins was discriminated against due to three key factors during the assessment. These factors, while independently may not necessarily denote discriminatory behavior, can still signify discriminatory conduct based on the context and weight …show more content…
Furthermore, Hopkins was told to “take a course at a charm school” or found lacking in the “congeniality factor” which were dated standards only applied to women in a workplace (Badaracco, 14). When considering that Hopkins was the only woman nominated for partner, it is evident that these comments are derogatory and sexist when evaluating a candidate for a job. Finally, pages of Hopkins’ assessment chose to only comment on her lack of vaguely defined “interpersonal” skills rather than evaluating any of Hopkins’ work, specific skill sets or holistically weighing multiple skills to see if the entirety of her performance was worthy of partnership. In fact, towards the end of the evaluation, an assessor wrote, “If you get around the personality thing, she’s at the top of her list or way above average” (Badaracco, 23). These three factors, linked clearly to discriminatory practices, drastically affected Hopkins’ chances at securing the partnership and, ultimately, led her to file a sex-based discrimination lawsuit against the …show more content…
These methods ought to be set on measuring job-relevant characteristics, collecting objective and quantifiable data on candidates while promoting transparency and accountability in their promotion methods (Rissing, 16). PwC ought to develop a rubric which can have a rating scale and detailed explanations for each metric on the scale which focuses only on the job-relevant characteristics of the candidates in question. For example, rather than a vague comment on interpersonal skills, a rating system can be established to ask how well on a scale of one to ten does a candidate work with their team on a daily basis. Then, each of the job-relevant metrics on the evaluation form could be given a predetermined weight. Consequently, even if a candidate ranked low on interpersonal skills on the form, her expertise in other stations could easily outweigh this weakness and prove her eligibility for partner. Moreover, PwC needs to set more objective criteria to determine who becomes partner within the organization. Rather than solely relying on personal reports and references from a variety of people, it needs to have some established metric which would evenly weigh the hours, success rate and quantifiable performance rate to provide detailed information to assess a candidate. Even if the personal references are heavily
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
...of their offering, referencing an added “risk” from taking her as a client (Williams 70-71). This is clearly an act of discrimination by bank. The fact that our society is largely built on race is an issue today as people experience unfair treatment that comes along with racial stereotypes. For example, blacks are often seen as uneducated which, as in Williams’ case, can lead to unfair treatment. Racist people or organization can lead minorities to have the inability to experience the same job opportunities, education, and healthcare benefits among many other situations. In order to reform the treatment of people the racial caste system needs to be destroyed in the United States and throughout the world. It is time to realize that all humans are biologically equally; our variations are simply traits that define our genetics, not necessarily or backgrounds or morals.
Discrimination in the workplace can occur more frequently than many expect in this advanced society. The history of job discrimination in general is vast and covers many different areas. In America, the history of discrimination in the area of employment options is a sobering one that reaches far beneath the surface of what many want to know about our seemingly “fair” society.
Despite the passage of protective federal legislation in the forms of the Equal Pay Act in 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Acts of 1964, there still exists prominent gender discrimination in the workplace that negatively impacts career advancement for women. This is best seen through the case example of Ann Hopkins. Hopkins was denied a career advancement to partner status within Price Waterhouse solely based on her perceived femininity and not the quality of her previous work for the company. This incident occurred in 1982, roughly 20 years after the passage of the Equal Pay Act and Title VII. Although the Equal Pay Act and Title VII have made great strides towards economic gender equality in the United States, they are by no means complete. The United States needs additional legislation in order to guarantee equal pay for equal work.
Abigail Fisher applied for admission to the University of Texas in 2008 and was denied. She was unqualified for the university’s top ten percent plan (Ten percent plan definition: guaranteed admission for any student in the top ten percent of their high school class (has to be in state of Texas)). For those who do not meet the requirements of the ten percent plan their applications are determined by several factors such as race. Fisher proceeded to sue the University, and claimed that utilizing race as a factor for the application process violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. She claimed that the University discriminated her for being white, but the district court claimed the admissions process constitutional. Then
On February 4, 2015, attorney Brian Ellison on behalf of petitioner, Gary Debaun and Jeffrey Geldens on behalf of the respondent, the State of Florida stood before the Florida Supreme Court to argue under section 384.24 (2) of the Florida Unlawful acts statute, whether the definition of “sexual intercourse” is limited to sex between a man and a woman or if the statute extends beyond the conduct of penile-vaginal intercourse. Following the review of this case, I will begin by presenting the key facts, followed by a summary of the petitioner and respondent’s cases, and finally my analysis and thoughts concerning the case.
Ms. Case is a 38 year old female who presented to the ED after wrecking her car late yesterday afternoon into a wall in a parking lot. Ms. Case Eloped from ED just prior to wrecking vehicle after refusing "headache cocktail". Ms. Case denies wanting to harm herself, she reports just having poor judgement during a anxiety attack. At the time of the assessment Ms. Case denies suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation and symptoms of psychosis. Ms. Case reports a history of PTSD, Anxiety, depression, and Schizo-affective Disorder. She reports yesterday attempting to park her car in a parking lot after experiencing an anxiety attack while driving. Ms. Case states, "I tried to slam on breaks, but I actually think I slammed on the gas." She further states, "I don't want to hurt myself." Ms. Case reports a history of multiple sexual assaults and rapes. She reports at the age of 17 she was molested by a neighbor, at the age of 24 she was sexually raped by "the east coast rapist", and another time by an unknown individual. Ms. Case reports she experiences flashback and frequently have nightmares. Ms. Case expresses symptoms of depression from these traumatic events. She expressed depressive symptoms as feelings of worthlessness, sadness, isolation, insomnia, and anger. She denies any current
Discrimination in the workplace continues to be topics and issues of discussion, despite efforts to minimize or eliminate its ugly head. Discrimination is defined as the unfair or prejudicial treatment of people based on race, gender, disability or age (Fieser, 2015). Furthermore, some companies has used other forms in conjunction with discrimination like sexual harassment to mask unjust treatment in the workplace. Lilly Ledbetter was an employee at Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Inc. for over 19 years. During this period, she consistently received low rankings in her annual performance-and-salary reviews. As a result, Lilly received significantly lower raises than her male counterparts, which led to her filing a civil lawsuit
Sessions, D. D. Looks discrimination: If looks could kill…. Equal Opportunity Career Journal, Nov-Dec 1995, 1-6.
Hiring an individual is simple, but getting the right individual takes a lot of effort and this makes a big distinction. The finest workforce gets the work done, they are bliss to supervise and assist the organization’s development. Recruitment focusing on merely employing warm bodies could result in headaches and unexpected setbacks. Sudden hire might need hours of management and time used up in control, retraining in addition to terminat...
...anization. As outlined in the “Devanna Model” the interrelatedness of all principal HR functions would lead to costly consequences for the organization as a result of unsuitable applicants being chosen in the selection process. While the selection processes available are versatile, including models of probation, random selection, quota systems, empirical considerations, and intrinsic attributes, there are several common characteristics which are often found when selecting external candidates. These include CV screening, preliminary interviews, application forms, psychometric testing, assessment centres, interviews, medical examinations, and reference checks. As each method has a different validity and reliability, it is important for HR officers to use a combination of different methods to objectively predict and select the most suitable workers for the job.