Affirmative Action and Sexual Harassment

The most important source of anti-discrimination employment law is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act in 1972, which gave the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the power to enforce the Act (Machan & Chester, 2002; Meiners, Ringleb, & Edwards, 1994). Title VII and its amendments prohibit all forms of employment discrimination against employees, applicants, and union members on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, and gender at any stage of employment. Title VII applies to employees with 15 or more employees, labor unions with 15 or more members, labor unions that operate hiring halls, employment agencies, and state and local governing units or agencies (Miller & Jentz, 2000).

Title VII prohibits both intentional and unintentional discrimination. The former type of discrimination is known as disparate-treatment discrimination. This establishes certain protected classes of individuals consisting of minorities, women, and others. Additionally, disparate-impact discrimination is said to occur when an employer's workforce does not reflect the percentage of non-whites, women, or members of other protected classes that characterizes qualified individuals in the labor market. To augment Title VII, the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967 (29 USC Sections 621-634) and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 USC Sections 12102-12118)

. . .
e emerge from the Fourteenth Amendment and from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Hall, 1992). This Act prohibits employers from discriminating against anyone on the basis of race, age, gender, color, religion, or national origin. It established an agency, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC), which is empowered by Congress to help the individual complainant seek redress under the statute. Affirmative Action programs have been implemented with the intention of advancing protected classes of workers (including racial and ethnic minorities) into the workforce and into desirable positions (Miller & Jentz, 2000). Affirmative Action programs were validated by the Court in United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979), in which the Court held that this was permissible under Title VII as long as the program was designed to correct a societal pattern of discrimination, is temporary, and does not unduly limit the possibility of advancement for nonminority employees. Both Congress and the courts have continued to affirm the necessity of ending workplace discrimination and to provide remedies for individuals who claim that they have been victimized (Hall, 1992). Ivancevich (1998) distinguished between equal opp
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Title VII, Eugene Calvasina, Affirmative Action, Compliance Programs, Additionally Ivancevich, Supreme Court, Rights Act, Miller Jentz, United Racial, Indeed Paul, affirmative action, title vii, miller jentz, civil rights, equal opportunity, sexual harassment, ivancevich 1998, jentz 2000, miller jentz 2000, equal employment, equal employment opportunity, rights act, civil rights act, employment opportunity commission, office federal contract,
Approximate Word count = 1386
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Affirmative Action and Sexual Harassment