Being a state founded on the notion of capitalism, private companies and organizations in the US have been given a relative level of freedom to make decisions more so pertaining to how they manage their day-to-day activities ( Shaanan, 2017). For instance, such companies are allowed to formulate neutral policies such as a look policy whereby there is a particular recommended aesthetic for employees. Such freedom, however, might be subject to exploitation in terms of giving the companies opportunities for discrimination ( Shaanan, 2017).
To this end, the regulations provided for under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 seek to protect employees from discrimination by employers ( Danowitz et al., 2012). Grounds of discrimination provided for under this piece of legislation include; sex, race, color, national origin, and religion. The drafters of this legislation were definitely aware of the free-market system, which is the common practice in the US, and the danger that lurks in it in terms of providing a leeway to discrimination ( Danowitz et al., 2012).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Abercrombie & Fitch case is a good example of how this free-market system practice can be exploited. It is not in contention that this system was put in place so as to promote a fair competitive market environment, however, it is only common for a myriad of issues to arise in any case where there is minimal or no regulation at all more so issues of discrimination ( Danowitz et al., 2012). For instance, in this case the corporation rejected the job application of Samantha Elauf on grounds that her wearing of a head scarf would violate the companies look policies that required all employees not to put on anything on their heads ( Danowitz et al., 2012).
On the face of it, the actions of the company might have been intended to enforce its internal policies as was expressed in the dissenting opinion of the court by Justice Thomas, however, a keen analysis of the same reveals that the actions were discriminatory in nature and as such did not put into consideration the interests of Samantha Elauf. The dictates of the Utilitarianism theory provide that the wrongfulness or rightfulness of a policy are fully dependent on its consequences and as such it moves beyond the scope of one's own interests and takes into account the interests of others (Herring, 2017).
In conclusion, the interplay between business activity and a free-market system might provide negative effects in that one of the entities involved might fail to take into consideration the interests of other parties and as such these parties might feel discriminated (Herring, 2017).
References
Danowitz, M. A., Hanappi-egger, E., & Mensi-klarbach, H. (2012). Diversity in organizations: Concepts and practices . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Herring, J. (2017). 15. Applying ethical theories. Law Trove . doi:10.1093/he/9780198788928.003.0015
Shaanan, J. (2017). America's free market myths: Debunking market fundamentalism . Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
