Law and order is a very vital aspect in the society. It serves to check vices and to offer guidance to members of the society in order to bring about harmonious living. In cases where the law is broken, the culprits are punished using an already set system that involves a number of processes. The system is aimed at correcting the vices in the society and making those who commit crimes be better persons. The processes are clearly outlined in order to help everyone to follow through without any difficulties.
In respect to the case, John is likely to file a lawsuit for discrimination on the basis of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as codified, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (race, color, gender, religion, national origin). The implication is that John, as the litigant must present to the federal district court a notice of right to sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). According to EEOC (2006), the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers with over 15 employees to discriminate based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. All Americans are protected from race or color discrimination and potential retaliation by employer for complaining about discrimination or taking part in EEOC investigation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Elements of Hostile Working Environment that Warrant the Claim
The use of an inflammatory name that is derogatory to Hispanics by John’s supervisor warrants a fining of discrimination. By the complainant’s own admission, the employer’s behavior made their work environment intolerable (EEOC, 2006). Intentional discrimination under the law is perceived to occur when the decision of the supervisor is affected by the individual’s race. The law covers racial animosity, and conscious or unconscious stereotypes about abilities or traits of an individual of a certain race. Race and color discrimination laws enforced by EEOC prohibit differential, less favorable treatment, or harassment because of race or color. The case shows that John is a victim of subtle harassment that may constitute unconscious behavior, justifying the supervisor’s violation of the EEOC laws.
Satisfying Elements of Hostile Working Environment
By using an inflammatory and derogatory name to Hispanics, the supervisor satisfies elements of racial harassment. The EEOC (2006) defines racial harassment as an unwelcome conduct that potentially interferes with performance of the employee or creates intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. Offensive jokes or name-calling qualify as examples of harassment conduct. While an isolated incident has lower potential of creating a hostile working environment, John’s case is serious because the incident is repeated frequently by the supervisor (Zemelman, 1993). The employer in the case has a defense against the complaint on the basis that the supervisor’s unwelcome conduct does not reflect the organization’s policy on dealing with racially diverse employees. The employer may force the supervisor to take individual responsibility for violation of the EEOC laws. However, the employer should be held culpable for allowing an environment where employees could perpetrate racial harassment. Zemelman (1993) observed that the development of after-acquired evidence defense allowed employers to escape liability or mitigate damages in Title VII by introducing evidence of employee wrongdoing discovered after the employment decision was made. Under the circumstances, the employer may avoid responsibility and subject the supervisor to the legal process.
Employment discrimination law in the US is drawn from common law and is codified in state and federal laws. Under common law jurisdictions, prima facie refers to evidence that unless refuted, is sufficient to prove a proposition or fact (Zemelman, 1993). Therefore, evidence on racial harassment claims brought against the employer or supervisor may be admissible in the court.
The Complaint Process
The Administrative Office of the United States Courts (n.d) manual provides guidelines on filing a formal complaint. The complaint process is under the jurisdiction of the constituent office of EEOC, managed by the Fair Employment Practices Officer (FEP Officer). The EEOC office stipulates that the employees who believes they have been discriminated against must file a complaint within 30 days of the occurrence of the incident with its officer (Selmi, 1996). The complainant is then obliged to request for informal counseling. The counseling offers a platform for gathering minimal facts necessary to assess whether discrimination claim is being raise and the possibility for early conciliation (Selmi, 1996). Upon completion of counseling, the employee is issued with “Notice of Completion of FEP-CP Counseling”, and a “Notice of the Right to File a Formal Complaint” within seven days of its receipt. Employees wishing to file formal complaints after counseling use the FEP office’s “Formal Complaint form to describe elements of the discrimination claim. Upon receipt of the formal complaint, and satisfaction as legally sufficient, the FEP officer issues a letter of acceptance that articulates factual allegations and the basis for claim under applicable law and administrative office guidelines (Selmi, 1996).
References
Administrative Office of the United States Courts. (n.d). AO Manual, Vol. 4 (Human Resources), Ch. 3 (Fair Employment Practices). Retrieved from http://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/feps-1c.pdf
Selmi, M. (1996). The value of the EEOC: Reexamining the agency's role in employment discrimination law. Ohio St. LJ , 57 , 1.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2006). Questions and Answers About Race and Color Discrimination in Employment. Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/qanda_race_color.html
Zemelman, C. K. (1993). The After-Acquired Evidence Defense to Employment Discrimination Claims: The Privatization of Title VII and the Contours of Social Responsibility. Stanford Law Review , 175-211.
