Title Vii

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is one of the most significant laws in American History. Before the ADA was passed, employers were able to deny employment to a disabled worker, simply because he or she was disabled. With no other reason other than the person's physical disability, they were turned away or released from a job. The ADA gives civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, and religion. The act guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, employment, transportation, State and local government services, and telecommunications. The ADA not only opened the door for

The Americans with Incapacities Act (ADA) got to be law in 1990. The ADA is a social equality law that forbids oppression people with handicaps in every aspect of open life, including employments, schools, transportation, and all open and private places that are interested in the overall population. The motivation behind the law is to ensure that individuals with handicaps have the same rights and open doors as other people. The ADA is separated into five titles (or segments) that identify with distinctive ranges of open life.(Eeoc.gov, 2015)

The disability can range from any form of walking, talking, seeing, hearing, and learning. This law also extends to persons diagnosed with HIV or AIDS as well any person who has completed drug and alcohol rehabilitation. This law was enacted to protect people with disabilities and provide them with employment opportunities. All organizations within in United State of America must provide these disabled employees with various accommodations such as elevators, access lamps, and telephones with hearing impaired equipment. If an organization does not comply with this law they maybe subject to civil penalties such as $55,000 for the first violation or $110,000 for each subsequent violation. If cited for major noncompliance the organization could cause warranty compulsory and punitive damages (United State Department of Labor,

Facts of the case: Imagine you are an HR manager and your boss and owner of the company, Bill, comes to you suspecting his assistant, Paige, is stealing money from the company. Bill would like a polygraph test conducted to see if Paige is stealing from the company. He would also like you to conduct electronic surveillance on Paige’s work e-mail for anything suspicious.

I am a little fascinated by an act for personnel who are called to duty to serve in the armed forces. The Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) provides protection to National Guard and Reserve members. When civilian workers return to active duty, Under the USERRA, employees are entitled to return to their civilian jobs after completing their military service. This act was put in place to protect reemployment benefits and nondiscrimination rights of individuals who involuntarily or voluntarily take a leave of absence from their job to serve their

There are legal protections in place for wrongful discharge and may be classified as arising from grounds of constitutional, statutory or common law regulations. As with all laws, some employees are only protected if employed in the public sector, unionized sector, or those employees who hold individual employment contracts. All things considered, the public policy exception to employment-at-will holds employers liable in tort for wrongful discharge when employees are terminated for taking actions that public policy requires. This type of wrongful discharge claim is recognized in about 40 states and if the courts allow the terminations to stand, it would offend and undermine public policy. In summary, employers cannot legally terminate employees

Furthermore, Section 8 of the LMRA, stipulates that it is an unfair labor practice by the employer; for an employer to interfere with, restrain, or force employees in the exercise of the rights, guaranteed in section 157 (Galiatsos, 2015). Thus, Section 8 specifically disallows the discharge, constructive discharge, layoff, suspension and failure to recall from layoff, demote, discipline, or take any adverse action against the employee, due to their concerted activities. Concerted activities can be viewed as protection available

On April 7th of this year, the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services announced that the statutory cap on H-1B visa submissions has been reached. This program, which allows U.S. companies to hire foreign workers who possess specialized skills in mathematical, scientific, or engineering disciplines, is limited to 65,000 petitions, in addition to 20,000 which are filed under an advanced degree exemption. As Berd & Klauss, PLLC, a New York City-based immigration law firm, explains, the USCIS will now reject and return all of the petitions that were not selected, along with any filing fees that were paid.

The Title VII of the Civil Rights of 1964 prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, skin color, religion, sex, gender or national origin. The other law which is the

The National Labor Relations Act was enacted to correct the labor relations unrest in the United States in the mid 1930’s (Vogel, 1998). The NLRA protects a firm’s employees from unfair employment practices. The law secures the rights of employees to unionization and elect leadership to represent their interests to management (Cameron, 2009). If an employer is found to have unlawful terminated an employee, an organization can be compelled to reinstate the employment for the affected employee. The employment reinstatement often times includes back pay for lost wage for the time the employee was off work. The NLRA protects employee from employer retaliation when they are engaged in lawful union or organizing activities. When an employee is hired

The for-cause dismissal system created by s 103 is a key aspect of enhancing fair employment relations, by protecting employees in an area of significant power imbalance. Unjustified dismissal takes up 65% of all personal grievance cases there is no denying that s 103 is a key piece of legislation for employee protection (Rasmussen, 2009). Before the ERA was amended in 2004 it is argued that unjustified dismissal clauses from the 1970’s legislation heavily favoured employers as there was no strict definition as to what was deemed ‘unjustified’, creating an imbalance of the employer-employee relationship (Roth, 2001). The amendment which introduced s 103(a) was a welcomed addition to the act from an employment rights perspective as it gave employees

Despite the fact that the company did pay wages in compliance with National Labor Law, the wages were just enough for living. A good company should appreciate the efforts of the employees and motivate them by establishing a rewarding system (Monahan, 2012). It was unethical that the company kept silent and still wanted to have the extra efforts put by the workers without any incentives. It is expected that as the productivity rises and thus the

The union should be victorious in this case. The union had negotiated to have this bulletin board put up at the company. There was no negotiating on what could or could not be posted on the board. By removing the two memoranda, the company violated section 7 and 8(a)(1). The company took away the unions rights by attempting to coerce, restrain and interfere with the union. The company also prohibited the employees from reposting the memorandum and if they did they would be subject to discipline, which is also a violation of section 8(a)(1). The company should have asked to negotiate with the union in more detail of what could be posted on the board. Instead they made a decision to remove the memorandum and so the unfair labor practice

Citizens Information Services Employment Right Section has been authorized by your former employee Ms. Penny Lane to contact your Goodself in relation to termination of her employment.

When your employer finds something in your background check they don’t like, they might deny employment. If this happens, you will have the right to dispute the findings in a process called adverse action. This will effectively put the hiring process on hold, as the employer can’t deny you employment while there’s an on-going dispute.