Introduction
Equal employment opportunity (EEO) is essential to human resource management. EEO is a concept embedded in the premise that all employees must be treated fairly in all aspects of employment to maintain or achieve fairness and equality. EEO principles apply when making decisions on hiring and recruitment, termination, conditions of employment, employment requests, compensation and pay scale, benefits, bonus and incentives, demotions, attendance and leave management, disciplinary measures, transfers and promotions, and appearance and dressing (England et al., 2020). Various laws have been passed in the United States to ensure employers make honorable and fair employment decisions. These laws entitle employees to free themselves from protective characteristics such as religion, race, national origin, color, or gender when applying for jobs, thereby allowing them to protect their interests. EEO is insufficient in removing barriers at the workplace, given the long history of discrimination in the United States.
Major Government Agencies that Enforce Discrimination Laws
The American constitution holds various EEO laws that prohibit particular types of discrimination in the workplace. In America, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has established two agencies, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and the Civil Rights Center, that oversee matters regarding EEO laws, including their enforcement and monitoring (Benokraitis, 2019). The Civil Rights Center deals with EEO in activities and programs that receive financial assistance from the federal government. In addition, the agency ensures that equal opportunity is assured for all new applicants to DOL and current employees. On the other hand, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs deals with employers who hold federal contracts and subcontracts.
In the U.S., there are other federal agencies in addition to the two EEO agencies under the Department of Labor, such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC is an independent federal agency encouraging employers to practice equal-opportunity employment. It promotes equality in the workplace by enforcing federal civil rights laws at the judicial and administrative levels. Additionally, the agency provides technical and educational assistance to applicants and employees in the state and local government, most private employment sectors, educational institutions, labor organizations, and employment agencies (England, Levine, & Mishel, 2020). Often, country-level authorities find it crucial to inspect the workforce of various organizations to boost and mandate equal opportunities and diversity. These agencies ensure that employees feel treated fairly and equally by their employers or people of authority in the organization. As a result, it promotes various HRM factors such as improved performance, employee engagement, and customer satisfaction.
Theories of Unlawful Employment Discrimination
All states have laws that warn against discrimination, such as the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD). These laws stipulate several common theories of illegal employment discrimination that a plaintiff can litigate. The provisions of the statutes guide investigations on EEO and influence judges’ decisions. During decision-making in a courthouse, judges cite one or more of the theories of EEO as case precedence, thereby making these elements necessary in establishing discrimination in a case. Additionally, decisions made by EEOC, MSPB, and OFO follow these appropriately established legal theories. According to Mathis et al. (2020), precedence-setting cases collected from American legal history influenced the formation of these theories making them appropriate and applicable in most American workplaces. This section will discuss two theories: disparate treatment and harassment.
Disparate Treatment
Under federal and state laws, it is an unfair practice for an employer to reject a job applicant, discharge an employee, bar an employee from employment, or discriminate against an individual in various terms and conditions of employment, such as compensation based on a protected characteristic (Mathis et al., 2020). Under this theory, an employer is said to have committed disparate treatment offenses when they treat some individuals less favorably because they bear one or more protected characteristics.
However, to establish a prima facie case, the plaintiff must prove that the employer treats some people less favorably because they belong to the protected class. For example, it is discriminatory when an employer dismisses an applicant because their age is over forty years or because they have a disability. The claim is also valid only if an act of harm occurred due to the discrimination, such as being denied promotions or bonuses. At the same time, other people in similar situations were not treated as adversely as the alleged victim or were provided more favorable treatment. Additionally, the case is valid if the retaliator or discriminator knew of the protected classes (Mathis et al., 2020). For example, the employer must have known of an employee’s disability or religion before accusing them of using these characteristics to fire the individual.
Hostile Work Environment
The theory of a hostile work environment or harassment is only actionable if it is pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment. According to (Ryan, 2019), to be able to establish prima facie for a harassment claim, the plaintiff must provide facts that prove that a) the plaintiff bears protected characteristics and the employer knew of the harassment, b) the aggravation was unwelcomed, c) the harassment is ascribable to the employer, and d) the terms and condition of the employees were affected by the harassment.
For example, a pregnant employee who has been a victim of constant ridicule from her boss because of the changes in her body has been affected mentally and psychologically, leading to deterioration in her mental well-being and self-esteem. This has, in turn, negatively affected her performance at work. Due to the poor work performance and productivity, her pay has been reduced/ cut, and she has been warned that if the poor performance continues, her employment contract may be terminated. The employee may have a basis to sue her employer for harassment. However, she must prove that her employer knew that she was pregnant, that the insults actually occurred, and that the reduction in her work performance is directly related to the ridicule.
Comparison of the Two Theories
The theories of harassment and disparate treatment are similar in that they are founded on the impression that the harm the plaintiff experienced is directly related to the discrimination and the discrimination happened because the victim falls under a protected class. However, the two theories differ in that disparate treatment is discrimination when an employer intentionally excludes a person from an employment opportunity due to a protected characteristic. In contrast, harassment occurs when the individual has already been hired and is receiving unfair treatment at the workplace.
Protected Characteristics
For this section, the protected characteristics include disability, pregnancy, and age. Age is a protected characteristic that demands that an individual shall be treated equally despite a) not being of a certain age or age group, b) someone thinking they are of a specific age or age group, and c) connection to a person in a specific age or age group (discrimination by association). In the U.S., the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 protects people 40 years or older against discrimination in hiring, compensation, promotion, terms and privileges of employment, and discharge based on age (Ryan, 2019). This protected class prevents employers from mistreating older applicants or workers due to their age.
The Americans with Disability Act (1990) prohibits discrimination against people with disability in all public living areas, such as schools, jobs, and transportation. Disability refers to a condition in which a person has a mental or physical impairment that has long-term and substantially adverse effects on their ability to conduct daily activities (Ryan, 2019). The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (1978) clarifies that discriminating against an individual based on pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, or related medical conditions is a type of sex discrimination; therefore, it is prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Protection against maternity discrimination is viable only for 26 weeks after having a baby (Widiss, 2021). This protected characteristic protects women against direct victimization and discrimination.
Conclusion
The context of equal employment demands that employers should not use specific grounds that will unfairly affect their decision to reject or hire candidates. EEO improves overall recruitment channels, boosts customer satisfaction, and promotes employee engagement. The critical principle of EEO stipulates that everyone has an equal right to pursue a job based on their merit irrespective of their protected characteristics such as age (above 40 years), sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, pregnancy, race, creed, color, hepatitis c, and HIV/AIDS status, national origin, immigration or citizenship status among others. Various laws have been set to protect these characteristics, and numerous government agencies, such as the Civil Rights Center, have been established to enforce them.
References
Benokraitis, N. V. (2019). Affirmative action and equal opportunity: Action, inaction, reaction. Routledge.
England, P., Levine, A., & Mishel, E. (2020). Progress toward gender equality in the United States has slowed or stalled. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(13), 6990-6997. Web.
Mathis, R. L., Jackson, J. H., Valentine, S. R., & Meglich, P. (2020). Human resource management (16th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Ryan, C. (2019). Identity and discrimination in the workplace: An intersectional, legal history. FAU Undergraduate Law Journal, 172-180. Web.
Widiss, D. A. (2021). Pregnancy and work–50 years of legal theory, litigation, and legislation. Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper, (435). Web.