Introduction
Based on employee information in Balanced Workforce Initiative, Xerox Corporation develops a government policy yearly. When this guideline was implemented, Xerox management discovered that there was a disproportionate representation of Black employees, which was considerably lower than that of White ones (Gowan et al., 2022). A workforce imbalance might result from this situation, which must be addressed. Xerox has taken action to decrease the advancement of Black employees. Since Xerox acts differently, Black employees harmed by the business’s practices have launched a lawsuit against the company.
Workplace Discrimination and Types
Evidence suggests that black employees are subject to discrimination for a variety of reasons. Policies, procedures, and laws with different implications seem neutral, yet one group may benefit from protections and reservations while another feel discriminated against (Hauret & Williams, 2020). On the other hand, unfair treatment occurs when one group of individuals is treated differently directly because of their ethnicity, sex, locality, or skin tone (Baum, 2021). In this instance, the business does not consciously discriminate against Black people and agrees with governmental initiatives. Monitoring the company’s participation of white people and how they treat black people, however, appears less desired.
Burden of Proof
The defendant must establish that subordination to the service provider is not discriminatory after the suit has gone to trial. Xerox looks to correctly adhere to the government’s employment guidelines from the court’s perspective. When a business finds that its support for black people has led to a disparity in the number of black and white employees, it gives whites priority in promotions without intending to do so (Scarborough et al., 2019). This action is a stepping stone towards preserving the proportion of white employees.
However, the company’s goals are unclear since they are not stated when black employees who feel they are the targets of discrimination sue Xerox and claim they have a promotion history court on their side. As a result, the court attempts to rule in favor of Black people based on the evidence (Gowan et al., 2022). Xerox must demonstrate that its actions are not discriminatory, do not discriminate against Black people, and that its purpose is an equitable representation for people of all races rather than discriminating between White and Black people. Xerox must thus demonstrate that it had no discriminatory purpose.
Views on Avoiding Workplace Discrimination
Black employees at Xerox are becoming more prevalent due to restrictions on government recruiting and participation policies. White people are discriminated against when there is an imbalance in the workforce, and white people will experience this as a minority (Hays-Thomas, 2022). The existence of such an imbalance with a long-term booking is apparent. As a result, unless the government thinks about changing the policy, the corporation cannot hire in defiance of it, leaving the company with little option except to prefer whites for promotions (Hauret & Williams, 2020).
The approach is not the only option to resolve the issue, but it will speed up the entry of employees into the government, who are recruited in line with official policy. In this instance, Xerox provides white people more opportunities, which is not discrimination. This situation is inescapable, white HR manager, but what the corporation has to be worried about is not allowing things to go worse by completely excluding either Blacks or White people.
Summary and Conclusion
The reality of workplace discrimination is that it lowers people’s productivity inside a business. However, there are specific circumstances when management must use discretion, ultimately improving the organization’s work product quality and social worth. In this instance, the corporation discovered itself in a scenario where there are many more black employees than white employees, which ultimately results in whites becoming a minority.
References
Baum, B. (2021). Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policies: Are Organizations Truly Committed to a Workplace Culture Shift? Journal of Business and Behavioral Sciences, 33(2), 11–23. Web.
Gowan, M., DeMarr, B., & David, J. (2022). Human resource management, 5th edition: Managing employees for competitive advantage. Chicago Business Press.
Hauret, L., & Williams, D. R. (2020). Workplace diversity and job satisfaction. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion: An International Journal, 39(4), 419-446. Web.
Hays-Thomas, R. (2022). Managing workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion: A psychological perspective. Taylor & Francis.
Scarborough, W. J., Lambouths III, D. L., & Holbrook, A. L. (2019). Support of workplace diversity policies: The role of race, gender, and beliefs about inequality. Social Science Research, 79(1), 194–210. Web.