DOC PREVIEW
MSU PSY 255 - Legal Issues

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 6 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

PSY 255 1nd Edition Lecture 12 Outline of Last Lecture I Selection Outline of Current Lecture II Legal Issues in I O III Employment at Will IV Guidelines Current Lecture Legal Issues in I O Prior to the 60s it was okay to discriminate when making employment related decisions This changed dramatically with the passing of important Federal Legislation and publication of selection guidelines Civil Rights Act 1964 Title VII created Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EEOC Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures EEOC 1978 Principles for the Validation and Use of Selection Procedures SIOP 2003 Employment At Will Employees employers have the right to initiate or terminate employment relationship at any time and for any reason or none at all Reduces necessary documentation and work defending employment decisions But organizations still sued over wrongful discharge Negated by just cause discharge policies and employment contracts Guidelines Equal Pay Act 1963 These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor s lecture GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes not as a substitute Equal pay for equal the same work But remember comparable worth Brennan v Prince William Hospital 1974 Male orderlies turned patients over in bed and thus wanted more Civil Rights Act 1964 Cannot make employment decisions based on protected grounds Race color religion sex national origin Race African American Asian Caucasian Hispanic Native American National origin ancestry culture birthplace linguistic characteristics Need to make reasonable accommodations e g religious holidays accents pregnancy Disparate treatment Discrimination due to intentional differential treatment Diaz v Pan Am 1971 Male denied employment as flight attendant Pan Am argued job requires females for passenger comfort Sex is argued to be a bona fide job qualification BFOQ Disparate impact Unintentional discrimination due to employment practices that appear neutral Adverse impact Griggs v Duke Power 1971 Fewer African Americans hired but Duke Power argued discrimination was unintentional 80 rule assessing adverse impact Adverse impact if selection ratio of minority group is less than 80 that of majority group Americans 90 of 100 hired 90 selection ratio 90 x 80 72 selection ratio cutoff New Zealanders 50 of 80 63 vs 60 of 80 75 Sexual harassment Unwelcome sexual advances or requests that affect one s job and or impact employment decisions Quid pro quo this for that Favorable employment decisions in exchange for sexual favors Hostile work environment Verbal or physical behavior that creates intimidating or offensive work environment which interferes with one s job performance Civil Rights Act amendment 1991 Can sue for compensatory and punitive damages But there is a cap in the amount of money you can sue for Executive Order 11246 1965 Affirmative action for federal contractors Goal to increase number of minorities or protected class members Ranges from selective recruitment to preferential hiring NOT a quota system U of California v Baake 1978 Gratz v Bollinger 2003 Caucasian male students sued U of Michigan for denying admission because of its preference for minorities University had policy to add 20 points to all minority applicants Grutter v Bollinger 2003 Caucasian female student sued U of Michigan law school for denied admission due to its preference for minorities Law school showed individual consideration for applicants racial diversity is a in law school Moral of the story You need good practice and justification for AA Age Discrimination in Employment Act ADEA 1967 Protects EEs who are 40 years old Illegal to hire fire etc based on age or even indicate age preferences or limitations Don t set age constraints assess ability and performance Cleverly v Western Electric 1979 Cleverly fired 6 months prior to being vested He was 40 had good performance appraisal record replaced by a younger employee ADEA s illegal discharge policy i Member of protected class 40 yrs old ii Satisfactory work from performance appraisal iii Discharged iv Replaced by younger employee EEOC v U of Texas Health Science Center 1983 Maximum age limit of 45 for applicants of campus police officer In this case age was successfully defended as a bona fide job qualification BFOQ Due to public safety nature of job Americans with Disabilities Act ADA 1990 Prohibits discrimination against qualified employees with disabilities provided they can perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodation and without undue hardship to the organization Prohibits discrimination against qualified employees with disabilities provided they can perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodation and without undue hardship to the organization Prohibits discrimination against qualified employees with disabilities provided they can perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodation and without undue hardship to the organization Prohibits discrimination against qualified employees with disabilities provided they can perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodation and without undue hardship to the organization Ethridge v State of Alabama 1994 Police applicant denied employment due to disability which prevented him from holding gun with two hands Martin v PGA Tour 1998 Golfer s disabled right leg prevents him from walking golf courses and thus deemed ineligible for events Family and Medical Leave Act FMLA 1993 Allows eligible employees to take job protected unpaid leave for up to 12 weeks owing to family related issues e g pregnancy own or other s illness Illness requiring in patient care or continuous treatment Ensures employees return to similar position with equivalent pay and benefits Typical Discrimination Case Step 1 plaintiff demonstrates prima facie case on the face of it Numbers indicate adverse impact Typical Discrimination Case Step 1 plaintiff demonstrates prima facie case on the face of it Numbers indicate adverse impact Typical Discrimination Case Step 1 plaintiff demonstrates prima facie case on the face of it Numbers indicate adverse impact


View Full Document
Download Legal Issues
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Legal Issues and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Legal Issues 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?