Business Law

Law

Charles Lawrence

Grantham University

Disparate Treatment

Due to complaints from the minority groups regarding discrimination at workplaces, the government of the United States enacted the title VII in 1964. The paper outlined the protected groups that the employers were not allowed to discriminate. The elements of disparate treatment include refusal to hire or discharge an individual by him or her possessing protected characteristics. It also includes limiting, segregating or classifying an individual in a way which would tend to deprive or deprive the person an opportunity because of the protected characteristics (Eeoc.gov, n.d.). The protected characteristics are race, gender, nationality, color, and religion.

In the case of Janet, disparate treatments apply by the fact that Jane was left out probably because she was a black American. The case of her gender may also have contributed to being denied the position. Thirdly given that Jose a Chilean was appointed, it may be possible that nationality played a role in the appointment given that Latino Americans formed 35% of the employees. Though it may be easy for the employer to rebuff Jane’s claims, she can prove her prima facie case. Prima facie case requires that the plaintiff alleging discriminatory treatment be able to demonstrate that he or she belongs to a protected group. The plaintiff must also show that she or he qualified for the position and was denied and that the employer instead chose another person whose qualifications are similar (Hong G., n.d.). Jane’s case has all the four requirements thus; she can prove her prima facie case.

However, the plant may rebuff Jane's claims by stating that both Mr. Martinez and Jane were qualified, and therefore management board were at liberty to select one of them of which they chose Mr. Martinez. The plant can also argue that given that both Jane and Martinez were qualified for the job, Mr. Martinez had an added advantage of...