Human resources Essays (904 words) - McDonnell Douglas,

Abstract What is the difference between Disparate Impact and Disparate Treatment? How do these issues impact individuals and groups? These are the questions that I will answer and explain throughout this paper by using a couple of different court cases which explain how and give details in how employee discrimination is described and resolved by our judicial system. Understanding how each theory works will give employers and employees the chance to implement improved workplace policies which will reduce the chance of discrimination in the workplace. Disparate Treatment/Disparate Impact Employment discrimination is discrimination in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation. Like most discrimination, employment discrimination may take place intentionally or unintentionally. There are many types of illegal discrimination; however, I will discuss the two main types, disparate treatment and disparate impact, and the affect they have on individuals and groups in the following paragraphs. Background The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces laws enacted to prevent job discrimination. They are also involved in overseeing and policy making as it is related to job discrimination. Anyone who feels that their employer has discriminated against them in any way as defined by the EEOC; they have the right to file a complaint. One of the largest legislation the EEOC enforces is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (www.eeoc.gov) Title VII was established to ensure fair employment practices would be followed and free from discrimination. Two specific acts prohibited by Title VII are disparate treatment and disparate impact. Disparate Treatment Runkel defines disparate treatment as, when an individual of a protected group is shown to have been treated differently than other individuals similarly positioned. (Runkel, 2005) The issue is whether the employer?s actions were motivated by discriminatory intent. Discriminatory intent can either be shown by direct evidence, or through indirect evidence. An example of a disparate treatment case is McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). McDonnell Douglas Corp was an aerospace company in St. Louis. Percy Green was a black mechanic and laboratory technician laid off by McDonnell Douglas in 1964 during a reduction in force at the company. Green a civil rights activist protested that his discharge was racially motivated. He and others used cars to block roads to McDonnell Douglas factories. After this incident, McDonnell Douglas advertised for vacant mechanic positions, for which Green was qualified. McDonnell Douglas rejected Green?s re-employment application on the grounds of his participation in blocking traffic and Green was not hired. Green filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charging violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC found reasonable cause to believe that McDonnell-Douglas Corp.?s rejection of Green?s re-employment application violated the Act, which forbids discrimination against applicants or employees for attempting to protest or correct allegedly discriminatory employment conditions. The court made no finding on Green?s allegation that the McDonnell-Douglas had also violated the section which prohibits discrimination in any employment decision. (Green, 1999) Disparate Impact According to the legal dictionary, disparate impact also known as adverse impact refers to situations where an employment policy or practice adversely affects a protected class of employees. (?Disparate Impact,? n.d.) An example of this is when an employer uses a selection criterion that, intentionally or not, screens out an unequal number of women and/or minorities. Under the doctrine, a violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act may be proven by showing that an employment practice or policy has an unreasonably adverse effect on members of the protected class as compared with non-members of the protected class. An example of an disparate impact case is Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975) The major issues of this case were the plant's seniority system, its program of employment testing and the question of back pay. Albemarle had required applicants for employment to have a high school diploma and to pass two tests, the Revised Beta Examination and the Wonderlic Personnel Test. Albemarle hired a psychologist to study the job relatedness of its testing program. The study compared the test scores of current employees with supervisorial judgments of their skill in ten job groupings selected from the middle or top of the plant's experienced seniority. The study showed a statistically significant connection with supervisorial

The Formation of the Union of South Africa

The Formation of the Union of South Africa The politicking behind the scenes for the formation of the Union of South Africa allowed the foundations of apartheid to be laid. On May 31,  1910, the Union of South Africa was formed under British dominion. It was exactly eight years after the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging, which had brought the Second Anglo-Boer War to an end.   Color Bans Allowed in New Union of South Africa Constitution Each of the four unified states was allowed to keep its existing franchise qualifications, and Cape Colony was the only one which permitted voting by (property owning) non-whites. While is it argued that Britain hoped that the non-racial franchise contained in the ​Constitution courtesy of the Cape would eventually be extended to the whole of the Union, it is hardly likely that this was truly believed possible. A delegation of white and black liberals traveled to London, under the leadership of the former Cape prime minister William Schreiner, to protest against the color bar enshrined in the new constitution.​ British Want Unified Country Above Other Considerations The British government was far more interested in creating a unified country within its Empire; one which could support and defend itself. A union, rather than a federalized country, was more agreeable to the Afrikaner electorate since it would give the country a greater freedom from Britain. Louis Botha and Jan Christiaan Smuts, both highly influential within the Afrikaner community, were closely involved in the development of the new constitution. It was necessary to have Afrikaner and English working together, especially following the slightly acrimonious end to the war, and the satisfactory compromise had taken the last eight years to reach. Written into the new constitution, however, was a requirement that a two-thirds majority of Parliament would be necessary to make any changes. Protection of Territories from Apartheid The British High Commission Territories of Basutoland (now Lesotho), Bechuanaland (now Botswana), and Swaziland were excluded from the Union precisely because the British government was worried about the status of the indigenous populations under the new constitution. It was hoped that, at some time in the (near) future, the political situation would be right for their incorporation. In fact, the only country which may have been considered for inclusion was Southern Rhodesia, but the Union had become so strong that white Rhodesians quickly rejected the concept. Why Is 1910 Recognized as the Birth of the Union of South Africa? Although not truly independent, most historians, especially those in South Africa, consider May 31, 1910, to be the most appropriate date to be commemorated. South Africas independence within the Commonwealth of Nations was not officially recognized by Britain until the Statute of Westminster in 1931, and it was not until 1961 that South Africa became a truly independent republic. Source: Africa since 1935, Vol VIII of the UNESCO General History of Africa, published by James Currey, 1999, editor Ali Mazrui, p108.