Looks Discrimination
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Employment discrimination legislation has evolved to include race, disabilities, sexual harassment of either gender, and age. In lieu of this evolution and an increasing trend toward equality for all individuals in the workplace, the time has come for the protective reach of employment discrimination law to cover ugliness. While the proposal may cause titters at first, evidence exists that discrimination based on looks (or physical appearance) occurs in the workplace. An investigation was conducted by ABC’s 20/20 news program in 1994 that sent two men and two women into the workplace to secure the same jobs (Sessions 1). The individuals were coached to act in a similar manner during the interviews and took with them resumes with matching education and experience. The only difference was that one of the men and one of the women was superior in physical attraction to their counterpart. The results demonstrate whether intentional or not, looks discrimination does play a role in the employment process “In five cases out of five, the more attractive woman got the job; in three chances out of three, the more attractive man was hired” (Sessions 1).Historically, legislation aimed at physical appearance is not a revolutionary concept. Many jurisdictions had laws in the past that barred “ugly” or “unsightly” people from appearing in public places. Such laws today would cause an outcry among civil rights activists. Yet, legislation aim
. . .
al work environments.
Enhancing occupational mobility.
Minimizing social costs of litigation.
Facilitating resolution of employment-related disputes.
Eliminating employee retaliation.
(Amack 1)
There is a fine line on employment discrimination law when it comes to appearance. Typically, appearance discrimination lawsuits have been decided in favor of employers as long as the criteria for appearance is applied equally to males and females. For example, models cannot sue a potential employer for not hiring them because they were considered less attractive than another model because the same criteria is applied to male models. Age discrimination has recently come under the protective reach of employment discrimination law. In Camacho v. Sears Roebuck de Puerto Rico, a woman brought forth a lawsuit alleging that only employees older than 45 years of age were give rate reductions over $3.00 per hour, while no one under 45 years of age had (New 5). The court found in favor of the employee because “the employer failed to articulate any reason other than age to explain the policy’s disparate impact” (New 5).
Legislation aimed at appearance may find its best ally in age discrimination legislation because age play an important r
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Playboy Clubs, Discrimination Employment, According EEOC, Rights Act, Puerto Rico, Title VIIs, Title VII, employment discrimination, employment discrimination law, discrimination law, looks discrimination, Playboy Bunny, age discrimination, Commission EEOC, Forum Available, discrimination legislation, discrimination based, physical appearance, employment discrimination legislation, available http//wwwgooglecom, civil rights, lawsuit based, law available http//wwwgooglecom, discrimination law available, available http//wwwgooglecom november,
Approximate Word count = 1282
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Looks Discrimination
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
