Discrimination in a Work Place - Research Proposal Example

Discrimination in a work place Grade (Oct. 15th, Discrimination in a work place topic and analysis Discrimination in a work place refers to a situation where an employee or a certain category of employees are treated less favorably than others in the context of the work place, due to certain characteristic that are associated to such individuals or category of employees (England, 2012). There are various forms in which discrimination can occur at the workplace. In this respect, there are forms of workplace discrimination that are legal while other forms of discrimination are considered illegal and punishable by the law. The lawful discrimination occurs in the form of the workplace established rules that are justifiable, such as the discrimination in pay between the managers and their subordinates. While such a practice can be considered to be discriminative because the subordinates earn less than their manager while they probably work for equal hours each day, such discrimination is lawful, since the discrepancy in the payment arises from the difference in the duties and responsibilities held by the manager. Therefore, this discussion seeks to analyze unlawful discrimination in the workplace, which entails the unfavorable treatment of an individual or a group of individuals, based on certain characteristics that are legally protected (Turner & Laine, 2004). Through focusing on unlawful discrimination, the discussion seeks to create awareness on various forms that unlawful discrimination can take, while establishing the available channels of addressing this vice, with a view to creating a favorable working environment for all. Thesis: unlawful discrimination in the workplace is counterproductive and consequently should be abolished. Goals and objectives To differentiate between workplace discrimination and work place harassment To establish the different forms of work place discrimination that are inexistence To evaluate the duties and responsibilities of both employers and employees regarding workplace discrimination To establish the percentage of major employer companies that have established non-discrimination sex policy for their employees To form an opinion on remedies available for addressing workplace discrimination Summary of the main research findings Workplace discrimination and work place harassment Workplace discrimination Workplace discrimination refers to a situation where an individual is treated unfavorably in the workplace, due to the personal characteristics of the individual that are legally protected, such age, sex, race, disability e.t.c (Jewson & Mason, 1986). The discrimination of an individual in the workplace can be mooted on the individual through various means. First, the individual or a certain group of persons may be denied an opportunity during an employment recruitment exercise, not because they do not qualify or meet all the necessary requirements for the position, but simply because they possess certain characteristics (Foote & Goodman, 2011). Secondly, workplace discrimination may take the form of the denial or granting less benefits arising from the terms of employment of an individual or a group of individuals, since they posses certain characteristics or belongs to a certain group of people. Individuals in the workplace can also be discriminated against, through the unfavorable section of the individuals who are due for training, and leaving out others on the basis of their characteristics. Finally, an individual can be discriminated against through the process of unfair consideration and selection for retrenchment, dismissal, transfer or retirement (Jewson & Mason, 1986). Workplace harassment Workplace harassment refers to the situation where an individual or a group of individuals are made to feel embarrassed, humiliated and intimated, purely based on the certain personal characteristics that they possess, such as age, race, religion, disability or gender (England, 2012). The workplace harassment can take the form of making the work environment deliberately hostile for certain individuals, so they can feel unwelcome and unwanted in the workplace. Workplace harassment can also take the form of making insulting jokes and derogatory remarks about certain individuals or a group of people with the intention of making them feel uncomfortable (Foote & Goodman, 2011). Displaying sexually explicit content to certain individuals based on their gender, religion, age or sexual orientation for the sake of making them feel uncomfortable. Finally, workplace harassment can also take the form off asking individuals questions that are intrusive to their personal life and their sexuality. Forms of work place discrimination Direct discrimination Direct discrimination refers to the situation where an individual treats or makes a proposal to treat another individual unfavorably at the workplace (Appleby, 2008). Direct discrimination is meted by an individual directly to the other, due to certain assumptions that the discriminator holds regarding the person who is discriminated against. Such discrimination can for example happen when a recruitment panel refuses to employ an individual based on their gender, sexual orientation or age, by assuming that the characteristics of such an individual are not welcome in the organization. Indirect discrimination Indirect discrimination refers to the situation where a person deliberately creating an unfavorable condition in the workplace, so that certain targeted individual or group of people will feel disadvantaged (Turner & Laine, 2004). This can take the form of an organization establishing certain policies, rules and regulations that will seem fair to all employees, yet intended to disadvantage certain individuals or groups, for example the introduction of elevators to ease movement to the top floors, when the organization has some disabled employees who cannot access and use elevators. Further, indirect discrimination can take the form of an individual assisting or authorizing another person to undertake a discriminatory act against a certain person or a group of people (Turner & Laine, 2004). Such an individual becomes an accessory to the discrimination act indirectly. Duties and responsibilities of employers and employees regarding workplace discrimination The duties and responsibilities that are bestowed upon the employers and the employees in relation to workplace discrimination are almost overlapping. There is a very thin line between the duties that the employer should play and the ones that the employees should play, to ensure that there is no discrimination in the workplace. Nevertheless, the thin line that differentiates the duties of the employer from those of the employees in avoiding workplace discrimination eventually commit the employer to the responsibility of avoiding workplace discrimination, while that of the employee is to avoid workplace harassment (England, 2012). Therefore, the employer establishes the anti-discrimination policy, providing that the employer should not discriminate against the employees based on any unlawful grounds. Such anti-discrimination policies touch on the role of the employer in ensuring that the recruitment process is fair and equitable for all the employees. The responsibility of the employer also extends to the provision of a work environment that is fair to all employees, regardless of their sex, age, disability, race, color or their sexual orientation (Jewson & Mason, 1986). On the other hand, the responsibility of the employees is stipulated under the anti-harassment policy of the organization (Foote & Goodman, 2011). The anti-harassment policy prohibits any employee from conducting themselves in a manner that would make other employees feel offended, unwanted, uncomfortable or intimidated. Therefore, the employer also formulates the anti-harassment policy that states that no intimidating, demeaning or offensive conduct by the employees will be conducted within the organization (Appleby, 2008). The research undertaken to establish the nature of workplace discrimination measures that are undertaken by different organizations, which includes the companies listed under the fortune 1000, fortune 500, fortune 100 and Fortune categories has indicated that a majority of companies have taken appropriate measures to avert any form of workplace discrimination (HRC, 2011). The research indicated that a majority of these major companies prohibit workplace discrimination mainly based on the gender and the sexual orientation of the employees. Thus, a research conducted to establish the number of big companies that have established the anti-discrimination policies based on gender and sexual orientation between year 2003 and 2010 has indicated that there has been a rise in the number of companies taking measures to avert this form of discrimination. In this respect, the research indicates that in the year 2003, there were 96 companies categorized under the Fortune companies, where 96% of those companies had established an anti-discrimination policy based on gender and sexual orientation (HRC, 2011). The percentage of the Fortune companies that established an anti-discrimination gender and sexual orientation policy had slightly increased to 97% by the year 2008, although the number decreased slightly to 94% by the year 2010 (HRC, 2011). The same study also indicates that by the year 2003, there were 360 companies that had been categorized as Fortune 100 companies. Among these companies, 72% had established a policy for non-discrimination of employees against their gender or their sexual orientation (HRC, 2011). This percentage increased substantially and by the year 2008, among the 434 companies that were categorized as Fortune 100, 87% had established policies for non-discrimination of employees and the number remained the same for the year 2010, where 87% of the companies had established the no-sex and no-gender discrimination policy for their employees (HRC, 2011). Further, amongst the 702 Fortune 500 companies that were registered under the category in 2008, 70% of the companies had established a non-discrimination policy for their employees, and the percentage has increased, where among the 726 Fortune 500 companies registered in 2010, 76% had established a policy for non-discrimination of their employees on the basis of their sexual orientation (HRC, 2011). Finally, the research has indicated that among the 159 Fortune 1000 companies that were registered by 2008, 79% had established a policy for non-discrimination of their employees based on their sexual orientation and the percentage has remained fairly the same through 2010, with 79% of the companies establishing this policy for their employees (HRC, 2011). Opinion on remedies available for addressing workplace discrimination The law has established remedies for people who have been discriminated against in the workplace. Such discrimination can be experienced in the form of being disadvantaged by the condition of the work environment based on certain characteristics such as sex, age, race and religion (Turner & Laine, 2004). The discrimination can also occur in the form of unmet needs for certain category of people, for example the disabled people who require some specialized facilities to be comfortable at the workplace. Finally, the discrimination in the workplace can occur in the form of underrepresentation or non-representation of a certain category of people in certain major activities or work programs of the organization (England, 2012). Therefore, the individuals or group of people that feel discriminated can complain directly to the employer as the first remedial action, for the employer to address the discriminatory issue. On the event that the employer does not address the issue, the individuals can form a mediation team that would mediate between the discriminated individuals or groups and the discriminators. Where the mediation does not work, then the people who are discriminated against can proceed to present a claim in a court of law, where the appropriate legal action will be taken (England, 2012). References Appleby, G. S. (2008). Harassment and discrimination: And other workplace landmines. Irvine, Calif.: Entrepreneur Media. England, D. (2012). The essential guide to handling workplace harassment & discrimination. Berkeley, Calif: Nolo. Foote, W. E., & Goodman, J. (2011). Evaluation for workplace discrimination and harassment. New York: Oxford University Press. HRC. (2011). Workplace Discrimination Laws and Policies. The Human Rights Campaign. Available at: http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/Workplace-Discrimination-Policies-Laws-and-Legislation Jewson, N., & Mason, D. (1986). Modes of Discrimination In The Recruitment Process: Formalisation, Fairness And Efficiency. Sociology, 20(1), 43-63. Turner, B. J., & Laine, C. (2004, August 3). Unequal Pay for Equal Work: The Gender Gap in Academic Medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine. pp. 238-W-50. Read More