Answered You can buy a ready-made answer or pick a professional tutor to order an original one.
This assignment will assess Competency 3: Examine racial and national origin discrimination within the workplace.
Analyze the five scenarios listed below using the law you have learned thus far. Each analysis should be no less than 150 words in length and follow these guidelines:Double-spaced 12-point Times font One inch margins APA format (Title page, Citations, Reference page) Correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation
ScenariosAnne is employed by Bradley Contracting Co. Bradley has a 1.3 million dollar contract to build a small group of outbuildings in a national park. Anne alleges that Bradley Contracting has discriminated against her, in that she has not been promoted to skilled craft positions with Bradley because it thinks that it is inappropriate for women to be in skilled craft position and that most of the male skilled craft workers are very much against having women in such positions. Knowing that Bradley Contracting Co. has a contract with the federal government, Anne brings suit against Bradley under Executive Order 11246 for gender discrimination. Will she be successful? Why or why not? Maria Cardenas, a Latina woman, worked for Aramark as a housekeeper at McCormick Place convention center for over 20 years. It was a long-standing rule for employees that they could not remove any items from a trade show for personal use, even if an exhibitor gave them away. Employees found in violation of this rule would be immediately fired. In October 2004, Cardenas and a co-worker, Juanita Williams, were stopped by a security guard who noticed them carrying food items away from a convention that had just ended. Both employees were discharged, but Williams was later reinstated because she was a newer employee and allegedly had been told by Cardenas that it was okay to take the items in question. Cardenas filed a national origin discrimination suit against Aramark. What does Cardenas need to show to prove that her termination was in violation of Title VII, and how might Aramark defend its decision if she states a prima facie case? Sam has worked at Allied for several years with no problems. Avril is transferred into Sam’s unit. Sam immediately begins having a strong allergic reaction to the perfume Avril wears each day. After having to take days off work because of his allergies, Sam asks Avril if she can tone down her perfume. Avril does so for a few days, then resumes her usual amount. Sam does not complain any further but is thinking of quitting because his allergies are so bad. He doesn't want to go any further with Avril about it because Sam is white and Avril is Asian, and Sam thinks it might lead to a race discrimination liability for his employer. Is Sam correct? A white college receptionist is fired when it is found that she told a black college applicant that the applications for admissions are distinguished by race by the notation of a small RH in the corner of black applicants’ applications. “RH,” she says, is her supervisor’s term for “raisin heads,” which he calls African-Americans. Is the employee entitled to reinstatement? A white, non-Latino meat cutter was fired by his supermarket employer and replaced with a Latino worker for reasons he believes were racially motivated. Can he sue the company for national origin discrimination? Is it possible to commit national origin discrimination by favoring a Latino person over a white, non-Latino person? If so, what would the terminated employee need to prove to satisfy a prima facie case and then to succeed overall?