Question
Assignment: Preventing Employment Discrimination
The importance of complying with employment related laws becomes particularly evident when
reviewing discrimination cases. For this Assignment, you will research a discrimination case and
identify what occurred and what the organization could have done to prevent discrimination from
occurring.
In this Assignment, you will be assessed on the following outcome:
HR400-2: Identify employment-related laws organizations must comply with when hiring.
Learning Activity
It is strongly recommended that you complete this Learning Activity after completing all the unit
readings and before beginning your Assignment. This will help you practice important concepts
related to skills needed for the Assignment.
Assignment:
Before starting this Assignment, review the Assignment Checklist below.
Go to the Kaplan Online Library and search for an article on a recent court case that involved
discrimination (age, gender, disability, or national origin) in the hiring process. In a 2–3 page
expository research paper address the following questions:
1. What was the type of discrimination that was the basis of the case? Provide a summary of
what happened that led to the discrimination claim.
2. What was the law(s) that was involved? Provide a summary of the key elements of the law(s)
that was involved.
3. What could the organization have done differently to prevent the case from occurring?
Describe specific steps the organization could have taken to prevent discrimination from
occurring in the hiring process.
Bluestein vs. Cent. Wisconsin Anesthesiology
Question 1
What was the type of discrimination that was the basis of the case? Provide a summary of
what happened that led to the discrimination claim.
Despite working for over ten years at the Wisconsin Anesthesiology, the plaintiff, Linda Bluestein felt that she was discriminated because of an injury she sustained at work which eventually led to her dismissal at the workplace. An employee can be discriminated by his or her employer by various factors such as age, gender or national origin but in this case, Linda was dismissed from her position as an anesthesiologist after she failed to fully recover from her injury which prevented her from successfully completing her duties. Linda began her work at the company back in 1996 as a part-time and signed an employee agreement as required by the law. However, after two years he fully became a partner of Wisconsin Anesthesiology where she enjoyed all the rights and powers of a shareholder and a member of the board of directors where she participated in all matters affecting the company (“Employee or employer? Terminated doctor loses appeal in discrimination case because of employer status – Lexology,” n.d.). Unfortunately, in the fall of 2009, she sustained wounds in kayak mishap which made it troublesome for her to finish her work as an anesthesiologist regardless of taking endorsed time off to rest and recuperate. Subsequently, a couple of months after the fact, she asked for an inconclusive time away from her position which was denied and the board of directors needed to choose the path forward. She was given two options:
- To take four months leave of absence upon which on return she would fully return to work
- She would be allowed to resign from her position as of 31/8/2010 but would be dismissed from her position if she failed to submit her resignation by 16/9/2010
However, after failing to resign as of the set date, she was eventually dismissed from her position.
Related: Job Descriptions
Question 2
What was the law(s) that was involved? Provide a summary of the key elements of the law(s)
that was involved.
At first, Linda filed a discrimination lawsuit against the company in the district court for discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the rehabilitation act of 1973 and the title VII of the civil rights act of 1964. Some of the key elements of the case include:
- To determine whether the organization had the power and authority to hire and fire Linda as well as regulate her individual work.
- To determine the extent of organizations supervision of her work
- To determine if Linda had a supervisor
- To determine the influence of the organization on her work
- To determine whether Linda was an employee or an employer of the organization as expressed in the contracts (“Employee or employer? Terminated doctor loses appeal in discrimination case because of employer status – Lexology,” n.d.)
- To determine whether Linda participated in the sharing of the profit, losses, and liabilities of the company
Question 3
What could the organization have done differently to prevent the case from occurring?
Describe specific steps the organization could have taken to prevent discrimination from
occurring in the hiring process.
If only the company had held talks with Linda and convince her to leave her position in the company amicably since she could not complete her work, all this court process would have been avoided. Often, employees feel unappreciated in the work environment if they are given conditions under which they should work. In this case, Linda has not fully recovered from injuries she sustained at work. Therefore, the company should show a little appreciation by giving her time off to recovery. If not, the company should agree on which terms and conditions she should leave her position to pave the way for another anesthesiologist who would fill her boots in the company. The unfriendly dismissal from the company made her file the lawsuit, but this could have been easily avoided.
References
Employee or employer? Terminated doctor loses appeal in discrimination case because of employer status – Lexology. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=65bc0384-c94a-4f0f-a576-15a7a31921f4
Related : Recruitment Plan
