Introduction
The achievement of workplace equity in the United States employment field remains one of the most difficult cases that courts have to deal with. The key people that have been affected by workplace discrimination being mostly marginalized individuals, people of color and women. There have been prevalent discrimination in employment, consumer markets, the transportation industry, and education throughout the United States (Turner, 2020). Despite the United States being a country with complex labor history, the nation is still struggling to reconcile some key past atrocities. Among them are the slavery and Jim Crow that has articulated and advocated for justice and equity for all. Workplace discrimination remains a key challenge despite efforts to implement a national policy on equality in employment opportunities.
This case study aims to evaluate some of the key questions that entail: Why workplace discrimination remains a central justice issue in American culture? Secondly, how does the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act help to alleviate challenges brought about by workplace discrimination? Thirdly, what are the ways that can be used to address the gap in awareness that may lead to employer liability? This study is significant because it will help provide insight into a critical aspect facing the court system in the United States since Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was enacted. The paper follows a thesis that aims at studying race discrimination in the workplace since Title VII was enacted.
Literature Review
According to Astrada (2017), America has been facing a period marred with an oppressive employment system of legal segregation and slavery for almost ten decades. However, the author provides an insight into the matter by claiming that the policy concerning workplace discrimination took a dramatic turn in the early 1960s upon adoption of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by Congress (Astrada, 2017). The move served as the first legislative stand that propelled the nation towards realizing the national policy on the aspect of employment equity, at the moment when the nation is experiencing a situation where employer’s subject black employees to a different working environment as compared to their white counterparts, it is clear that the country’s decision on ultimate equity in the workplace is still dwindling. Therefore, it is clear that most workplace discrimination acts are manifested in masked and subtle discrete forms rather than in the explicit form championed in the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
According to Martin (2018), the court system in the United States remains divided on their evaluation of the difference in employment discrimination action that is a requirement in establishing a prima facie case of inequality (Martin, 2018). The majority of the courts claim that there have been advantageous changes within the workplace environment that have constituted workplace discrimination actions (Astrada, 2017). However, other courts such as Fifth and Third Circuits have disagreed with this fact while interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Acts as a key determinant for reaching an ultimate workplace decision.
Methodology
This case study incorporated various qualitative methodology paradigm that entailed critical concepts to address workplace discrimination. The study involved collecting various sources of evidence through evident quantitative means such as using key research methods; among them were interviews, observations, surveys, and secondary and primary sources such as newspaper articles and journals.
Findings and Discussions
According to a report conducted by the majority of the scholars, it was revealed that the amendment of Title VII provided claims for jury trials and damages. Therefore, employers were forced o abide by the legislation completely, thereby changing the stance of the American workplace (Martin, 2018). However, since the amendment of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in 1991, there have been many adjustments among them. The authors of Title VII did not incorporate in their amendment as they did not see the need. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended up creating the EEOC commission that was tasked with enforcing laws regarding harassment and job discrimination in the US (Turner, 2020). According to this research, EEOC processes over 80000 workplace discrimination cases, with nearly 50000 local agencies investigating cases linked to workplace discrimination complaints (Cabrera, 2021). With the growth in workplace discrimination cases, there has been a need by the EEOC to clarify all the policies regarding job discrimination as broad as possible.
Conclusion
In summary, the paper has demonstrated that the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act has helped alleviate challenges brought about by workplace discrimination by forming the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). This federal unit has been tasked with enforcing laws regarding harassment and job discrimination in the US. In a review, the court system in the United States remains divided on their evaluation of the difference in employment discrimination action that is a requirement in establishing a prima facie case of inequality. The majority of the courts claim that there have been advantageous changes within the workplace environment that have constituted workplace discrimination actions. Therefore, there is a need for future research to establish how the EEOC can fully address all the challenges related to workplace discrimination before the piled up cases can be arraigned in Court.
References
Astrada, S. B., & Astrada, M. L. (2017). Being Latino in the 21st Century: Reexamining Politicized Identity & the Problem of Representation.U. Pa. JL & Soc. Change, 20, 245. Web.
Cabrera, Y. (2021). The “Ultimate” Question: Are Ultimate Employment Decisions Required to Succeed on a Discrimination Claim Under Section 703 (a) of Title VII?. FIU Law Review, 15(1), 97.
Martin, N. (2018). Chapter 12. New Narratives, Same Old Problems: The Risk of Diversity-Centred Workplace Decision-Making in a “Post-Racial” America. In Employment Equity in Canada (pp. 259-283). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Web.
Turner, R. (2020). Title VII and the Unenvisaged Case: Is Anti-LGBTQ Discrimination Unlawful Sex Discrimination?. Ind. LJ, 95, 227.