JURIST Guest Columnist Ian Hayes, St. John’s University School of Law Class of 2013, is the author of the eleventh article in a 15-part series from the staffers of the Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development. He argues for the application of Staub v. Procter Hospital to Title VII claims to promote justice for workers…
Today, a
woman may find herself in a situation where she was fired based on
gender but has no legal remedy for this discrimination. Imagine the
following hypothetical. A woman works under a supervisor who has
repeatedly made it clear that he resents women who work for the employer
because of his perception that they get pregnant at a moment’s notice
and leave a hole in the workforce. Part of the supervisor’s job is to
write evaluations for everyone he supervises and he writes several
evaluations for the woman worker alleging that she has a poor attendance
record. The supervisor does not report similar attendance concerns
about male workers to his boss. A decision-maker in a managerial role,
who does not know the female worker, reads the supervisor’s written
evaluation. Even though the decision-maker does not have the
discriminatory intent of the supervisor, he decides to terminate the
worker based on the supervisor’s evaluation. Workers cannot sue their
employer for such discrimination in all jurisdictions and employment
discrimination law should be adjusted to make relief available for all
workers who suffer such discrimination.
To continue reading, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment