The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases
10th Edition
ISBN: 9781337535878
Author: Frank B. Cross; Roger LeRoy Miller
Publisher: Cengage Learning US
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 21, Problem 3BCP
Summary Introduction
Case s ummary : The workers of B, a factory warehouse, were required to follow the dress code which consisted of slack shirt and necktie for men and smock for the women. A female worker K and other female workers refused to wear the smock and they were fired for violating the dress code of the coat factory warehouse. The hours, salary, and benefits were similar for all male and female employees.
To find :Discrimination in dress code policy of B.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Learn your wayIncludes step-by-step video
schedule01:30
Students have asked these similar questions
Spotlight on Dress Code Policies—DiscriminationBased on Gender. Burlington Coat FactoryWarehouse, Inc., had a dress code that required malesalesclerks to wear business attire consisting of slacks,shirt, and a necktie. Female salesclerks, by contrast,were required to wear a smock so that customers could readilyidentify them. Karen O’Donnell and other female employeesrefused to wear smocks. Instead they reported to work in businessattire and were suspended. After numerous suspensions, thefemale employees were fired for violating Burlington’s dress codepolicy. All other conditions of employment, including salary,hours, and benefits, were the same for female and male employees. Was the dress code policy discriminatory? Why or why not?[O’Donnell v. Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse, Inc., 656 F.Supp.263 (S.D. Ohio 1987)] (See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.)
Employee, a Muslim, is a management trainee at an airport car rental office. As part of her religious practice, employee wears a hijab (headscarf). She is told by her supervisor that the hijab does not match the uniforms she is required to wear, so she must stop wearing them or be transferred to another position with less customer interaction. Employee was later terminated as part of a company cutback. She sues for religious discrimination. Does she win?
Employee, a Muslim, is a management trainee at an airport car rental office. As part of her religious practice, employee wears a hijab (headscarf). She is told by her supervisor that the hijab does not match the uniforms she is required to wear, so she must stop wearing them or be transferred to another position with less customer interaction. Employee was later terminated as part of a company cutback. She sues for religious discrimination. Does she win? Explain.
Chapter 21 Solutions
The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Mohamed Arafi, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Morocco, works as a valet dry cleaner for the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C. In December 2010, a supervisor allegedly prohibited Arab or Muslim workers from going on floors occupied by a delegation of Israeli diplomats. The supervisor allegedly told Arafi, “You know how the Israelis are with Arabs and Muslims.” Arafi says he complied with his supervisor’s instructions but consequently lost out on tips. He subsequently complained to another supervisor and the hotel’s director of human resources. Arafi says his work hours were cut, and that his colleagues said demeaning things about Muslims to him after the incident became known to them. Arafi brought suit under Title VII, alleging disparate treatment resulting in an adverse employment action (the loss of tips), as well as retaliation. The Mandarin Hotel claimed a national security exemption. Would either of Arafi’s claims be successful? Would the Hotel’s? [Arafi v. Mandarin…arrow_forwardHong, who was born in Vietnam, now lives in Los Angeles. She applies to be a waitress at Hooters. The manager of Hooters restaurant tells her, “Sorry, we rarely hire Asian girls because their breasts are too small and part of the Hooters’ image is waitresses with big breasts”. Does Tran have a valid claim against Hooters under the Civil Rights Act? Explain.arrow_forwardAn employee at an automotive sales business resigned from her position, claiming that she was forced to resign as the owner incessantly bullied her. The employee alleges that the owner had frequent mood swings and would subject her to abusive behaviour and discriminatory remarks. The owner would also throw tantrums and scream at employees on the show room floor and other public areas, calling them ‘stupid idiots’, ‘useless’ and ‘disgusting’. Identify the specific issue in question and the procedure that needs to be followed in order to resolve the dispute.arrow_forward
- KellyMarie Griffin works for the City of Portland, Oregon, as a clerical employee in the Parks and Recreation Department. She complains of conflict with her coworkers. In particular, Therea Lareau, the “lead” clerical employee at the same location, has made comments that are derogatory about or offensive to Griffin’s Christian faith. Ms. Lareau has referred to Griffin as “a wacko” because of her beliefs and, on at least one occasion, told Griffin that God was “a figment of [her] imagin[ation]” and that Griffin was “praying to something that didn’t exist.” Griffin also complains that many of her coworkers frequently page 51-42use “God” and “Jesus Christ” as swear words, which she finds offensive due to her religious beliefs. Griffin, however, admits that when she has informed her coworkers about how the swearing offends her, they have made efforts to avoid doing so in her presence—even Lareau. Despite that, things have deteriorated. Recently, Griffin and Lareau found themselves in a…arrow_forwardIn response to illegal or unethical behaviors of local union officials, the Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959 allows: Union members to immediately decertify the union National unions to take over and replace elected local officials with an appointed trustee The NLRB to run an immediate election of new union officials Employers to step in on behalf of their workers and take over the unionarrow_forwardBob writes an email to the managing partner of the firm saying "I think we have enough women in the firm now". After receiving this email, the managing partner declines to hire Sally for an open accounting position. This email is considered pretext direct evidence of discrimination not evidence of discrimination circumstancial evidence of discriminationarrow_forward
- Katie (not her real name) was a manager in a food manufacturing factory. She had a number of health and safety practice concerns around COVID-19. While Katie’s employer had some safety measures in place, she was concerned that the factory had not been effectively cleaned and decontaminated, and several employees had tested positive for COVID-19 and were off work. No senior personnel were on-site for Katie to raise her concerns with. As a result of her concerns and the stress they placed upon her, Katie left work and seek your advice. She wanted to report about lack of responsibility on the part of her previous employer that may cause the spread of Covid-19 at the factory. Advise Katie according to whistleblowing policy.arrow_forwardIn 2016, a group of Somali nationals filed a discrimination claim against Ariens, a Briliion, WI-based manufacturer of snowthrowing and small enging outdoor equipment. The employees, all Muslim, had been allowed to align their company-paid and designated break period with their daily religious obligations to pray. In January 2016, Ariens changed their policy to be less flexible and the employees were no longer able to align their rest periods with the timing of their prary rituals. Shortly following, the employees were discharged or resigned and filed a class suit against Ariens with the Green Bay office of the EEOC. Do they have a valid claim? Should Ariens continue to accommodate? What would you do if you were an HR officer at Ariens?arrow_forwardUnder the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees on the basis of their age once an employee has reached age 45. Group startsTrue or False True, unselectedFalse, unselectedarrow_forward
- Sam, a mid-level manager at his company, continually makes offensive remarks and gestures toward Susan, a non-manager at the company who works in another department. Susan quits her job and brings a lawsuit for sexual harassment. As a general rule under California law, the company Group of answer choices a. is strictly liable to pay general damages for the sexually harassing acts of its managers. b. is not liable if Susan complained about the problem and the company took no corrective action. c. is liable for punitive damages even if senior management had not been made aware of the problem. d. none of the above.arrow_forwardCase: Dismissal for constitutive act of sexual harassment against an employee Ms. Cruz was in her work area dispatching a patient file “standing and bent” when her supervisor “spanked her hip”. She expressed her indignation and told him that he had been disrespected and lacerated her dignity as a woman. This event occurred in the presence of several colleagues of Mrs. Cruz and around sixty (60) patients. The unwanted physical contact perpetrated by her supervisor towards that intimate part caused her to start crying and had to leave her work area to try to calm down. Since he could not get himself together, he requested authorization to leave his work shift early. Two days later, Mrs. Cruz returned to her place of employment and requested to be relocated to another area. On that same date, the department director interviewed her and drew up a preliminary report in which she described what happened. Later, and as a provisional measure, he relocated both Mr. Rosa and Mrs. Cruz to other…arrow_forwardMaetta Vance, an African American woman, worked at Ball State University as a catering assistant in the University Banquet and Catering Division of Dining Services. Over the course of her employment with Ball State, she lodged numerous complaints of racial discrimination and retaliation. She had a particularly acrimonious relationship with Saundra Davis, a white woman who was employed as a catering specialist in the Banquet and Catering Division. Vance complained that Davis “gave her a hard time at work by glaring at her, slamming pots and pans around her, and intimidating her.” She alleged that she was “left alone in the kitchen with Davis, who smiled at her”; that Davis “blocked” her on an elevator and “stood there with her cart smiling”; and that Davis often gave Vance “weird” looks. Vance filed an EEOC charge and, ultimately, a lawsuit in federal court against Ball State, claiming violations of Title VII for racial harassment. Davis, as a catering specialist, had some leadership…arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
- BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student EditionBusinessISBN:9781337407137Author:KellyPublisher:Cengage LearningEssentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...BusinessISBN:9781337386494Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana LoewyPublisher:Cengage LearningAccounting Information Systems (14th Edition)BusinessISBN:9780134474021Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. SteinbartPublisher:PEARSON
- International Business: Competing in the Global M...BusinessISBN:9781259929441Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. HultPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student Edition
Business
ISBN:9781337407137
Author:Kelly
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Essentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...
Business
ISBN:9781337386494
Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana Loewy
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Accounting Information Systems (14th Edition)
Business
ISBN:9780134474021
Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. Steinbart
Publisher:PEARSON
International Business: Competing in the Global M...
Business
ISBN:9781259929441
Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. Hult
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education