Activity 5.2- Case Analysis
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Maseno University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MISC
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by JackNjungi
Introduction
In this activity you will have the opportunity to review a Supreme Court case and provide an analysis based on the questions provided in the text.
Activity Instructions
Complete CASE 8.4, EEOC v. W C & M Enterprises, Inc. (pages 218-220).
These written assignments require that you answer these questions as completely as possible. Papers must be formatted according to the latest edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA). Writing Requirements (APA format)
2-3 pages (approx. 300 words per page), not including title page or references page
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page with topic and name of student
References page (cite the textbook)
Case Questions1.
According to OSHA, Workplace harassment is said to be an engagement of upsetting conduct or comment against an employee in the workplace that is known to be undesirable. The conduct or comments normally occur more than once, either for a long period of time or short period of time. This description of workplace harassment by OSHA is broad enough to include harassment prohibited by both Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which explain that harassment can be based on colour, religion, race, national origin, and gender, among others. An example of workplace harassment was is clearly described in Employment Opportunity Commission V. WC Enterprises Inc case. Mohommed Rafiq wan born in India and a Muslim was employed as a salesman in WC&M. After the terror attack that happened in September 11, 2002, his colleagues and supervisor implied that he was involved ain that heinous act and they started referring to him as Taliban on regular basis. They also referred to him as an Arab because of his physical appearance although he told them that he was an Indian. There were also other harassments from his manager that developed into a disagreement between the two. At one time, the manager told him that this was America and he must line and he must followed what
is done here. The Supreme Court ruled overturned the previous District Court decision by stating that Rafig claims were valid under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Question 1
Rafiq was harassed by his co-workers, supervisor, and manager on the basis of religion and on the basis of national origin. According to EEOC guidelines, discrimination on
national origin encompasses discrimination on the basis of cultural, linguistic, and physical of
a certain group. The evidence demonstrated that Rafiq experienced verbal harassment from the co-workers regularly for almost one year. During this period, the complainant was continuously abused “Taliban” and “Arab” by Kiene and Argabrite. Although the plaintiff constantly told his workmates that he was an Indian, they constantly called him “Arab” and “Taliban” because of his physical appearance after America started military attacks against Afghanistan. Another example of harassment based on national origin demonstrated by Keine’s question:
"Why don’t you just go back where you came from since you believe what you believe?” and Swigart’s statement: “This is America. That’s the way things work over here. This is not the Islamic country where you come from” As well, his workmates together with supervisor harassed him based on religion. Question like, “This is America. That’s the way things work over here. This is not the Islamic country where you come from” and constantly ridiculed his type of diet restrictions and prayer rituals during the workdays illustrates the kind of harassment the plaintiff experience in his previous workplace.
Question 2 The harassment based on national of origin and based on origin that was experienced by Rafiq adversely affected him. The plaintiff testified that the harassment triggered issues with his family life and as a result he was forced to look for counselling from a number of mosques. He also experienced sleeping issues, lost 30 pounds, and experienced gastrointestinal issues. It is not a must Rafiq show that the harassment he experienced caused him to lose sales or otherwise affected his work performance. Holding that the issue regarding harassment was factual- that the harassment was “severe or pervasive” when he was called Arab and Taliban severally in a day for a period of one year, and when his workmates mocked his diet practices
and prayer habits during, his manager commenting that he was a terrorist, and one at a time banged on the glass partition of the office to scare him. These are good indication that harassment was severe and therefore there is no need to demonstrate that harassment caused him to lose sales. Question 3:
3. What is an employer’s obligation under Title VII to prevent workplace harassment based on race, color, sex, national origin, or religion? What had the employer done in this case to stop the harassment?"
Title VII is a provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which
prohibits discrimination in virtually every employment circumstance on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, pregnancy, or national origin
.
https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/identifying-and-preventing-harassment-in-
your-workplace
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help