Legal Implication in Human Resources essay
In actuality, the discrimination of employees is legally forbidden. However, employees still face situations, when they face being discriminated by their employers. At the same time, employers are often ignorant of the fact that their policies are discriminatory as is the case of Wellness Foods and Apparel, which employs males only for work in warehouse and females only for the work in the cafeteria. Nevertheless, the company still manages to avoid lawsuits from the part of its employees, while lawsuits filed by applicants failed because the company has managed to prove that its policies are fair and not discriminatory. In fact, the discrimination of employees is very controversial issue and the company should be very careful to avoid new lawsuits in the future. In this regard, the company should create equal conditions and opportunities for the employment of individuals, regardless of their gender, race, age, and other issues, while the qualification of employees should be the primary criterion that defines their position in the company.
In fact, Wellness Foods and Apparel is vulnerable to the risk of filing lawsuits by its employees because of policies conducted by the company. For instance, the segregation of male and female employees, depending on the place of their employment in the company, i.e. warehouse or cafeteria, may be subject to discrimination claims. For instance, female employees may feel being discriminated as they do not work in warehouse, while male employees do not have access to cafeteria. In this regard, the company apparently violates Title VII, which bans discrimination on the ground of the sex of an individual. This means that employees cannot be discriminated in any way because of their gender. This norm covers all aspects of employment. However, Wellness Foods and Apparel ignores this norm preventing male employees from working in cafeteria or female employees from working in warehouse. In this regard, the company apparently violates Title VII and may face a risk of filing a lawsuit from the part of its employees. At any rate, the company can employ employees in warehouse and cafeteria, regardless of their gender.
In fact, the company has already faced considerable problems on the premise of the violation of Title VII, when the pregnant woman filed a lawsuit against the company but that time the company had managed to avoid the legal liability for discrimination in the field of employment because the court ruled that the company did not violate norms of Title VII. The pregnant woman was not able physically to perform the tasks expected by the employer. The case may involve the discrimination on the ground of sex. At first glance, the woman had an opportunity to get the job but, in actuality, this job did not fit her. To put it more precisely, she did not fit the job. First, she had to advertise male soccer and wrestling clothes. Therefore, she did not match the basic requirements to the applicant the employer had. In this regard, the company could suffer from the misrepresentation of its products by the female employee, in case she was hired. In addition, she was pregnant that would make the performance the job by the pregnant woman virtually impossible. She just could not demonstrate men’s soccer and wrestling clothes. The company would suffer substantial losses and discredit its image in the public eye. In this regard, the company could appeal that Title VII and other anti-discriminatory laws imply that policies conducted by employers in relation to employees should be reasonable as well as requirements of employees. In case of the pregnant woman, her requirement to provide her with the job was unreasonable. The employer should stress that demonstration of men’s wrestling and soccer clothes could be dangerous for her health and the job could be dangerous for her condition. In such a way, the decision of the company not to hire the pregnant woman was beneficial for both the company and the employee.
Furthermore, the case of Stan was more serious. Stan could refer to different legal acts and norms to file a lawsuit against the company after he was transferred from fitness demos, including Americans with Disability Act, the Age Discrimination and Employment Act, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, and others. Stan could not perform his professional duties anymore because of his physical disability. At any rate, the company considered Stan being unable to perform his functions properly. In this regard, the company could refer to the reasonability of retaining the position of Stan in fitness demos because he did not fit the position at the age of 50. He was not in the physical shape that could be good enough to attract customers. Therefore, he could not perform his functions properly anymore, while his transfer to customer service was a reasonable decision being taken by the company. In this regard, Stan could refer to Title VII but his position would be quite weak. This is why he did not file the lawsuit against the company.
Furthermore, if Stan regained his physical shape, he could continue his work. As he was moved from fitness demos to customer service, he retained his job and therefore, he did not suffer loss of job or other negative effects after his transfer. This is why he did not file a law suit. The Age Discrimination and Employment Act protects Stan from discrimination because of his age, but the company offered Stan a different job and conditions of this job satisfied Stan. In addition, the company could refer to his physical inability to perform his duties as he used to do before his 50th anniversary. The company could also argue that Stan got a better position in the company compared to the one he had before the transfer. At any rate, Stan was satisfied with his position in the customer service and he was not going to file a lawsuit against the company.
On analyzing policies conducted by Wellness Foods and Apparel, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that the company may face serious problems because of its segregation policies in employment professionals in the warehouse and cafeteria. The company should put the end to the practice of employing males only in the warehouse and females only in the cafeteria. This practice is not grounded and it is just unreasonable because both men and women can perform well, while working in the warehouse and cafeteria. Therefore, the company has managed to avoid legal liability for discriminatory issues but the company would hardly avoid legal liability, in case of either employees working in the warehouse or in the cafeteria or willing to work there file a lawsuit against the company if they do not get the job because of their sex. The company should be more tolerant in relation to the gender of employees working in the warehouse and cafeteria.
Thus, taking into account all above mentioned, it is important to stress that Wellness Foods and Apparel conducts controversial policies in regard to the discrimination of employees. The company has managed to avoid legal liability for discrimination of employees for a while but still the company can face a lawsuit filed by its employees because of the discrimination grounded on the gender of employees. However, reasonableness of policies conducted by the company and its relations with employees. Therefore, the company should avoid discrimination of employees anyway, while employees should be reasonable in their accusations of companies in case of discrimination.
