Discrimination Part 3
Introduction
The workplace rights of employees are essential in maintaining the order and harmony in a company. As an employee working for a company, each individual are entitled to have many rights, such as the right not to be discriminated or harassed, the right to be paid the minimum wage, the right to a safe workplace, the right to take leave to care for a sick family member, including birth or adoption, and the right to have privacy in personal matters (2006). The company or employer should provide their employees each of these rights and protect them from being deprived of their basic rights and privileges.
Family and Medical Leave Act
The Family and Medical Leave Act recognizes that there are justifiable reasons for an employee to take a leave from work, without the fear of retaliation or loss of employment ( 2005). This act allows employees to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of their families, to encourage their stability and economic security, and to support national interests in preserving family integrity. It also intends to reduce the tendencies for discrimination based on sex, while promoting equal employment opportunity for men and women ( 2006). In accordance to this law, the employer has the responsibility of granting this leave to their employees, whether working in a public agency or the private sector, given the employee is eligible for leave entitlement. As such, the employer has several responsibilities in response to the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Primarily, the employer is responsible for designating if paid leave used by an employee counts as a leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, based on the information provided by the employee. From this, an employee’s paid leave cannot be credited as leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act after the leave has already been completed ( 2006).
Secondly, the employer is required to maintain group health insurance coverage for employees whenever such insurance was provided before the leave was taken, and if the employee had continued to work. The employer’s obligation is to maintain health benefits under the Family and Medical Leave Act, and will only cease if the employee decides not to return to work at the end of the leave period, or fails to return to work (2006).
Lastly, employers must post a notice approved by the Secretary of Labor explaining rights and responsibilities under the Act, or else will be subjected to a fine of up to 0 for each separate offense. Moreover, employers are compelled to provide information to employees about their rights and responsibilities under the Family and Medical Leave Act, such as specific information in response to an employee’s notice of the need for a leave, and the consequences if the employee fails to return to work from his or her leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (, 2006).
Discrimination Based on Religion
The case that best illustrates and explains the right to religious accommodation in a company is the case of Albert Buonanno from Denver, Colorado. Buonanno was an employee of AT&T Broadband, who was fired after refusing to follow company rules and saying that the company has violated his religious beliefs about homosexuality. According to the reports, Buonanno objected to write and comment in a new employee handbook issued in January 2001 that said, “each person at AT&T Broadband is charged with the responsibility to recognize, respect and value the differences among all of us”, including sexual orientation or preference. Furthermore, he was fired after declining to sign a “certificate of understanding” recognizing that he agreed to the policy of the company. Buonanno felt that his Christian beliefs prevented him from valuing or agreeing with homosexuality, which he views as a sin, but pledged not to discriminate or harass anyone (2004).
This case has violated the US Civil Rights Act, as being implemented by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or EEOC. According to the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it prohibits not only intentional discrimination, but also practices that have the effect of discriminating against individuals because of their race, color, national origin, religion, or sex ( 2002). The law specifies that an employer is required to reasonably accommodate the religious belief of an employee or prospective employee, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship (2002).
The employer of Buonanno evidently violated the law for firing him by his refusal to support homosexuality, in accordance to his religious beliefs and practices. Refusing to support the issue of homosexuality must not be grounds for termination, as Buonanno even agreed to sign a document pledging that he would not “harass” anyone regarding their homosexuality and sexual preferences, but this was not good enough for the company (2006). This should be enough for the company to respect the religious belief of Buonanno, and should have not discriminated him for his refusal to go with their beliefs. As such, his action of filing charges with the company is justified, in standing up for his rights and privileges of regarding his religious practices. This case must serve a good example for other employers to protect and recognize the religious inclination and rights of their employees, not only in accordance to the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but for respect to individualism and personal preferences, as long as these beliefs and practices do not hinder the company’s operations.
Conclusion
In order for the employees to completely understand their rights and privileges in a company, the employers have to become responsible enough to make necessary actions and accommodations. Each individual in the company has the role of protecting the rights of everyone, and has the duty to uplift the dignity of their colleagues to foster a harmonious working environment.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment