Civil Rights Act Of 1964: Griggs V. Duke Power Company

Employment Laws Chart

Complete the chart below using information from the weekly readings and additional research if necessary.

| | |Court Case Influential to | | |
| |Description and Requirement of Law |Establishment of Law |Importance of Law |Workplace Application |
|Employment Law | | | | |
|
|Designed to end unequal application of|Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,|CRA 1964 Changed the American culture |Title VII – Means that during |
|Civil Rights Act of 1964 |voter registration and discrimination |Kansas.
This case resulted in the |and positively impacted all Americans|referral, hiring, firing, and |
| |in public areas, government, and |supreme court saying “We conclude that|and their pursuit of happiness |promotion that clear requirements are |
| |employment. |in the field of education the doctrine| |to be used that ensure these actions |
| | |of equal but separate has not place.” | |were not based on color, race,
|
| | | | |religion, sex, or national origin of |
| | | | |the candidate or employee. |
| |Granted enforcement powers to the |Griggs v.
Duke Power company. This |Provided enforcement mechanisms for |The EEOC could effectively employment |
|Equal Employment Opportunity Act |EEOC. The EEOC could effectively |case highlighted that if any hiring |Title VII |discrimination based on race, |
| |prohibit all forms of employment |action which prevented “Certain groups| |religion, color, sex, or national |
| |discrimination based on race, |of people” put of a particular job was| |origin. The EEOC could file civil |
| |religion, color, sex, or national |illegal unless the company could | |suits against organizations if unable |
| |Origin. |demonstrate job relatedness. | |to secure an acceptable resolution of
|
| | | | |discrimination charges within 120 |
| | | | |days. |
| |Requires that workers who do similar | |Removed the “glass ceiling” which kept|The act served to reduce the financial|
|Equal Pay Act |jobs must receive equal starting pay |No submission |women from earning an equal salarie |compensation gap between male and |
| | | |for equal work. |female workers. Salaries must be |
| | | | |based on skill, responsibility, |
| | | | |efforts, and working conditions. |
| | | | | |
| | |Court Case Influential to | | |
| |Description and Requirement of Law |Establishment of Law |Importance of Law |Workplace Application |
|Employment Law | | | | |
| |This act prohibits arbitrary age |No submission |Enacted to prevent arbitrary |Use of age as criteria of employment |
|Age Discrimination in Employment Act |discrimination, particularly among | |discrimination that was being practice|must be supported by legally arguable |
|of 1967 |those over age 40. A job notice or | |against aged people. Before the act |facts which state that an employee’s |
| |advertisement may specify an age limit| |companies were known to fire older |age has a direct impact on their job |
| |only in circumstances where age is | |more expensive employees and replace |performance. |
| |shown to be a “bona fide occupational | |them with cheaper new employees. | |
| |qualification” reasonably necessary to| | | |
| |the normal operation of the business. | | | |
| |Extends EEO coverage to include most |Aline v. Nassau County, the ADA views |extended employment protection to most|A company may also be required to |
|Americans with Disabilities Act of |forms of disability, requires |contagious |forms of |provide necessary technology so that |
|1990 |employers to make reasonable |diseases as any other medical |disability status, including those |an individual can do his or her job. |
| |accommodations, |disability. With respect to AIDS, |afflicted with AIDS. |If technology could assist individual |
| |and eliminates post– |exceptions can be | |in doing the job, then the company |
| |job-offer medical exams. |implemented, but most of these are | |must provide it if that accommodation |
| | |rare. | |does not present an undue hardship. |
| |prohibits discrimination on the basis |Patterson v. McLean Credit |Reinstated burden of proof by the |Individuals claiming they have been |
|Civil Rights Act of 1991 |of race and |Union (1989), the Court, by narrowly |employer, and allowed for punitive and|intentionally discriminated against |
| |prohibits racial harassment on the |interpreting a provision of the Civil |compensatory damage through jury |may sue for damages. The amount of |
| |job; returns the burden of proof that |Rights Act of 1866 that prohibited |trials. |these compensatory and punitive |
| |discrimination did not occur back to |discrimination in making contracts, | |charges, however, is |
| |the employer; reinforces the |had refused to extend the law's | |prorated based on number of employees |
| |illegality of employers |protection to an employee's claim of | |in the organization |
| |who make hiring, firing, or promoting |post‐hiring racial harassment. | | |
| |decisions on the basis of race, | | | |
| |ethnicity, | | | |
| |sex, or religion; religious minorities| | | |
| | |Court Case Influential to | | |
| |Description and Requirement of Law |Establishment of Law |Importance of Law |Workplace Application |
|Employment Law | | | | |
| |provides employees in organizations |No submission |Most employees who take leave under |Businesses must allow employees up to |
|Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of|employing 50 or more workers within a | |the FMLA shall be entitled, upon their|3-months of unpaid leave for family |
|1993 |75-mile radius of the organization the| |return, to be restored to their |related issues such as adoption, |
| |opportunity to take up to 12 weeks of | |positions of employment or to |illness of a relative, etc… |
| |unpaid leave in a 12-month period for | |equivalent positions with equivalent | |
| |family matters | |employment benefits, pay, and other | |
| | | |terms and conditions of employment | |
| |Requires federal government agencies |No submission |provided impetus for state |organizations frequently establish |
|Privacy Act of 1974 |to make available information in an | |legislatures to pass similar laws |special review procedures. For |
| |individual’s personnel file. | |governing employees of state- and |example, whether the employee can |
| | | |private sector |review the file alone or only in the |
| | | |enterprises. |presence |
| | | | |of an HRM representative is up to each|
| | | | |organization. In either case, |
| | | | |personnel |
| | | | |files generally are not permitted to |
| | | | |leave the HRM area. |
| |Requires specific government-related |No submission |organizations must |Employers receiving a minimum of |
|Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 |groups to ensure that their workplace | |provide substance-abuse awareness |$25,000 in federal funds must provide |
| |is drug free. | |programs to its employees |training for its employees. |
| |Prohibits the use of lie detectors in |No submission |prohibits employers in the private |companies may no longer use these |
|Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 |screening all job applicants. | |sector from using polygraph tests |tests |
| | | |(often referred to as lie-detector |to screen all job applicants |
| | | |tests) in all employment decisions | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| |Description and Requirement of Law |Court Case Influential to |Importance of Law |Workplace Application |
|Employment Law | |Establishment of Law | | |
| |Specifies for employers notification |No submission |places specific requirements on |An organization employing 100 or more |
|Worker Adjustment and Retraining |requirements when closing down a | |employers considering significant |individuals must notify workers 60 |
|Notification Act (WARN) of 1988 |plant or laying off large numbers of | |changes in staffing levels. |days in advance if it is going to |
| |workers. | | |close its facility or lay off 50 or |
| | | | |more individuals |