Question #1: Evaluate the conduct of Peter Lewiston against the EEOC’s definition of sexual harassment. Analysis: GIlbury and Lewiston worked together for several years. Their relationship was “cooperative”. Gilbury reported their relationship began to change and Lewiston’s behavior was “out of the ordinary”. The EEOC’s definition of sexual harassment was his actions “created an extremely sexually hostile environment” Many coworkers stated Lewiston was a “lonely” guy. Lewiston sent Gilbury several cards on different occasions one card accompanied with roses. He also asked her to lunch on 2 different occasions which she responded no to both times and told Lewiston she is “a happily married women”. One card stated “I hope you can …show more content…
2012). Although Lewiston’s actions were not severe the actions were still unwanted, therefore, Lewiston was let go because Gilbury was unable to perform her job. Snell, S., & Bohlander, G. (2012). Equal Employment Opportunity and Human Resource Management. In Managing Human Resources (16th ed.). Manson: Cengage Learning. Question #3 If you were the district’s EEOC officer, what would you conclude? What disciplinary action, if any, would you take? Analysis: Lewiston’s relationship with Gilbury began to change during year 2007-2008. Gilbury believed Lewiston was paying more attention and his behavior was “out of the ordinary”. Lewiston began to give Gilbury multiple compliments such as she had “very beautiful eyes”. He then began to leave Gilbury letters. One day at school she found 12 roses and a card from Lewiston. The card stated “ Please forgive me for thinking you could like me. I played a big fool.” He asked her to lunch for the second time and she again replied they are just friends. He then tried to apologize to Gilbury and when he approached her she became very upset. He “accidently” brushed her hair and Gilbury drove away. Lewiston again gave Gilbury another letter. He apologized for trying to develop a relationship with her. Gilbury did not file a sexual harassment claim with her supervisor
Roma and Clint Underhill had both had a long day. They were the owners of a successful real estate
Gomez-Mejia, L., Balkin, D., & Cardy, R. (2012). Managing Human Resources (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
The Data that has been collected, read, and analysis was to determine Miguel’s strengths and challenges (weaknesses). According to Miguel’s Data his strengths are Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, and Vocabulary. In the phonemic awareness: The student is scoring very well in phonemic awareness/oral language. He was able to get 10 out of 10 in sounding out words. He was also able to
The first lawsuit claiming discrimination because of refusal of sexual advances by a coworker was filed in 1974. Although the term was never specifically used in the case, “Barnes v. Train (1974) is commonly viewed as the first sexual harassment case in America” (Fenelius, 2010). Paulette Barnes was hired as an administrative assistant in the Equal Employment Opportunities Division of the Environmental Protection Agency at grade GS-5 with a promise of “a promotion to grade GS-7 within ninety days” (“BARNES v. COSTLE”).
Mark volunteered to help with the community arts festival; he was supporting the not-for-profit organization as he had in the past. However, he did not know his good intentions as a volunteer would cost him his job as an assistant manager. The retail store’s phone number was printed in the festival advertising in error and ticket requests overloaded the phone lines, causing loss of business and annoyed the store manager. As a result, Mark was seen as the cause of the problems and terminated.
Name an appellate court case in which an employer was found liable for either quid pro quo or hostile environment sexual harassment. Describe the facts of the case and the decision the court came to in the case. Include the citation to the case and a link to it online. Would the case apply to Pollard's case? Why or why not? Would you want to use this case in Teddy's favor or Pollard’s favor? (10 points)b. Explain which form of sexual harassment you suspect the NJ Human Rights commission found Virginia had been a victim of and why you feel that is the case. Provide law or a case to support your position. If you feel Pollard was not a victim of harassment in this case, explain why you feel that way, and provide law or a case to support your position. (10 points)c. Explain what defenses to sexual harassment Teddy's had in this case. (Include the name and citation of at least two federal or state sexual harassment cases that provide precedent support to your defense statement.) (10 points)d. What is disparate treatment and why do you think the Human Rights commission found it had occurred? Do you agree with this decision? (10 points)
As discussed, I have over two years’ experience overseeing and monitoring the workplace harassment/discrimination complaint processes for three local government organizations during which time I conducted investigations regarding complaints concerning discrimination and/or harassment in the workplace and was responsible for compiling and responding to any internal or external complaints with regard to EEOC, USERRA, ADA, etc. I wanted to take a minute to expand on one item discussed during our meeting with regard to making final determinations
It’s chairman and four commissioners had been affirmed by the Parliament only one month previously. A small workforce of about 100, detailed mostly from other federal businesses, was confronted on opening day with an instant backlog of nearly 1,000 accusations, called “charges” in the parlance of the brand new regulation. Most of the charges had been forwarded by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense Fund, which had labored with a alliance of civil rights groups for passage of the brand new regulation. Brand new charges of service discrimination filed with Equal Employment Opportunity bestrided quickly. Although it had been evaluated that 2,000 charges of discrimination would be filed in the first year, 8,852 invoices were filed. While the Commission attempted to progress and reciprocate to these invoices, it also was striving to hire more workforce and develop basic techniques to progress invoices. Moreover, in these early years, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was impacted to confront the many substantive and procedural problems lifted by the brand new regulation. A youthful Equal Employment Opportunity Commission lawyer remembers the first year as “frantic, delighting and overtiring. Before they could even think of trying to appease invoices of discrimination, they had to conceive a
Vinson 477 US 57 (1968), Vinson was hired as a teller and her supervisor was Sidney Taylor. Over four years, Vinson was promoted multiple times, eventually to branch manager. It was undisputed that her promotions were based on merit alone.Vinson’s employment was terminated for excessive use of sick leave. She then filed suit against Taylor and the bank, alleging that she had been subjected to sexual harassment during her time at the bank. Vinson claimed that she had sexual intercourse with Taylor on multiple occasions, out of fear of losing her job, and that he fondled her in front of other employees. Vinson allegedly never reported the sexual harassment out of fear of losing her job. The court explained that there is no definitive rule for liability for an employer, but the bank is not completely free of liability just because Vinson did not make any reports of sexual harassment. The court decided that the bank was “absolutely liable” for sexual harassment from a supervisor, regardless of whether officials knew or should have known about the
3. Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) cited in Leatherbarrow C., Fletcher, J. & Currie, D. (2010) Introduction to Human Resource Management. 2nd Edition. London: CIPD
Jennifer is a 2nd grader being referred for possible learning disabilities in reading. Jennifer has always attended Sand Hill Elementary and has not repeated a grade. She is eight years old. She has been screened for vision and hearing problems and was found to have normal vision and hearing. Her teachers have described her as cooperative and likable. She does not exhibit behavioral problems.
Case Name The Smithson’s Mortgage Case Study Teams This case is designed to be conducted by a team of students. The discussion, questioning, and resolution of differences is an important part of the learning experience. Another significant advantage is the sharing of the workload in preparing the final case study report. Knowledge Background This case draws heavily on the material presented in Chapters 2 and 3 of Principles of Engineering Economic Analysis, 4th Edition by White, Case, Pratt, and Agee, particularly Section 3.4 (Principal Amount and Interest Amount in Loan Payments). To a limited extent it draws on concepts from Chapter 4 (Measuring the Worth of Investments), Chapter 5 (Comparison
Downsizing has become a commonplace strategy for organizations to adopt in an effort to cut costs, eliminate redundancies, and streamline organizational systems. Over the last 15 years, many organizations have engaged in downsizing more than once. Most companies have learned from the mistakes of the past, but some companies are still trying to use the same tactics today that were used in the mid 1980s, that leave employees reeling.
MGT 615 Radio Shack Case Page 3 of 5 3. Do you think the board’s decision to fire Edmondson was “tough” as Len Roberts suggested? Why or why not? Why do you think Mr. Roberts would have described this decision as such? The board’s decision to fire Edmondson was “tough,” as Len Roberts suggested, but in terms of ethics it is not at all tough decision, because Edmondson’s behavior violates the company’s ethics and morality. Not only
1. Jerry Kline and Grace Gallo are too eager in getting customers and reaching their quotas without thinking what would be its effect to the company. They focus more on money instead of having a good