Dear Writers, I am narrating a new(probably) technique adopted by a smart customer to have a work free of cost, for information of my fellow writers.

Customer received the completed work, gave a revision order saying that there are 'two- three' spelling mistakes, whereas there were none. Before receiving any response from either me or the company and with out quoting any reasons, the customer cancelled the order. Pained to see that he/she did not consider the amount of hard work I have put in for that.

I am sure the customer must have kept a copy of the assignment and blissfully cancelled the order...He/she got it almost free of cost.

Can somebody guide me how to tackle such crooks..

If wishes, anybody can see the work...its here..

Law relating to Equal Employment Opportunity

Employment Law is mainly dealt with body of laws regarding administrative rulings, and precedents, which addresses the legal rights of, and restrictions on working people and their organizations. The labor movements have been instrumental in the enacting laws protecting labor rights in the 19th and 20th centuries. Labor rights have seen integral to the social and economical developments since the industrial revolution.

As per Henry Kissinger (1973) the task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not been. So for a leader it is import display varied leadership styles according to the demands of the diverse situations. To prevent the problems like discrimination of workforce and safe guard the interest of the employees the leader has to acquire the tactics like vision, strategy, communication, buy-in, motivation, empowerment etc. Besides, he has to plan an overall goal to achieve the thriving end and he must have precise objectives to gain this goal.

As the problems in the organizations have been growing up, the importance of human rights has also come front. Hence the federal government is clear about the EEO laws .The government insists that employers are always responsible for the unlawful acts of discrimination or harassment in the workplace.As said above, there are number of laws enacted with the view to ptotect the equal rights of the employees in the workplace. Now we shall analyses these laws and regulations.

The Civil Rights Act 1964

The civil rights Act safeguadrs the rights of all citizens with regard to the constitutional right to vote, to protect the individuals against the discrimination in public accommodations , to authorize the concerned authorities to initiate approppriate action ,to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education and to engage the commission on civil rights and also on Equal Employment Opportunity. (Skog, 2007)(1)

The Act of 1964 is deadly against any unemployment practices in working places by the employer. It says that the employer would be liable for any practices of failure or refusal of hiring or training, any kind of discrimination and deprival and classification of any employment opportunity because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. (2) The Act insists that the employer should not control any admission to apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on- the-job training programs to discriminate against any individual because of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.At the same time the Act make free the employer from ceratin laibilities. The Act specifies that no employer shall be responsible for hiring or training or classifying the individuals based on class and creed where a bona fide occupational qualification or requirements may be necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise. (3)(Skog, 2007)

The Civil Rights Act 1991

After the decision in Wards Cove Packing Co Vs Atonio (4) which weakened the scope of effectiveness of federal civil rights protections, the civil rights Act 1991 amended the Act of 1964 and introduced ceratin changes in Federal Rights Law. It mainly intends to provide damages in the cases of intentional employment discrimination and to clarify provisions regarding disparate impact actions.(5) The Act of 1991 enunciates apprppriate remedies,mainly for intentional discrimination and unlawful harassment in the workplace and to provide adequate protection to the victims of various discrimination .(6)

National Origin Discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964 prohibits any kind of national origin discrimination, which covers employers with 15 or more employees. The employees are, irrespective of their nationality, ethnicity or accent, entitled to the same employment oppertunities as others. National origin discrimination also includes treatment of someone less favorably at work because of marriage or other association with someone of a particular nationality.The title includes the violation of any kind of employment decisions,harrasment and language.The safeguards under this Act extends to foreign nationals also.(7)(Grofman,2000)

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act

Here the Act prohibits any kind of discrimination of the women employees because of pregnancy, childbirth any other unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII, which includes employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. As per the Act the pregnet women must be treated as other employees with similar abilities or limitations.The Act covers those employees in the employment agencies, labor organizations and federal government. Like other statutes, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act set the rules gaginst the violation of the equality while hiring, training, classifying etc. The Act directs the employer to treat the pregent woman as other temporarily disabled employee if she is unable to perform her job due to pregnancy. Employers must hold open a job for a pregnancy-related absence the same length of time jobs are held open for employees on sick or disability leave. Here the employer has the power to require his employee to submit the doctor's statement regarding their ability to work before granting leave or paying sick benefits.(8)

The employer must ensure that any health insurance of the employee may cover expenses for pregnancy-related conditions. Moreover, the pregnancy-related expenses should be reimbursed and the Employers must provide the same level of health benefits for spouses of male employees as they do for spouses of female employees.

Pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions shall be treated the same for all employment related purposes as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work. However, the court insisted that the plaintiff should set up a prima facie case of discrimination, if she adopted the indirect approach (McDonnell Douglas burden--shifting method). To face this burden she must prove that she was pregent and her employer was aware of it, she was doing her duty without anty fault but she was discharged and similarly situated employees not in the protected class were treated more favorably. Moreover The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 empowers the eligible employees who takes the leave under this Act to be restored to the original position or the position equivalent to the former one.By this, the FMLA restrict the power of any employee to interfere ,restrain or deny such rights of the employee. (Lewis, 2004)(10)

Race /Color Discrimination

Title VII of 1964 Act specifies that the employment opportunity should not be denied to any person on the ground of race, percieved racial group and race related charecteristics like color,facial features etc. Such person can not be discriminated because of their married status or association with someone of particular race or color. The Act enumerates that it would be unlawful if there is any kind of discrimination occurs while recruiting, hiring, promoting and transfering a person of different race. The work assignments, the work environment, performance measurements, job training, discipline and discharge, wages and benefits and any other types of privileges of the employment should not be denied to any person because of the fact thst he is of another race. The Title VII does not any form of intentioanl discrimination but alos the kind of neutral job policies that may affect the persons of certain race. The Title also prohibits Harassment/Hostile Work Environment,any discrimination in Compensation and Other Employment Terms,privileges and classification of employees on the basis of Race.

Apart from this, certain cases show that the court has taken different views on this issue. In Allen Vs Potter,(12) the court held that management was not liable for the act of workers who made some racial comments on black .In another case Smith Vs North Eastern III Univ.(13) the court cleared the view that a hearsay harrassment could not validate the claim of racial harrassment. In this case, a staff overheard some racial insults made by University Public safety and the court held that such second hand harrassment could not amount to an objectively hostile work enviroment.

Religious Discrimination

The Title VII directs the employers not to treat employees or applicants more or less favourably based on their religious beliefs or practices subjected to the warranted relgious accomodation. The employees should not be forced to participate in any religious activities as the condition for the employment opportunity.The actual religious practices of the employees should be accomodated in a proper manner by providing flexible scheduling, voluntary substutions and job reassignments. The employers should allow the employee to hold a religious expression if such expression would not cause any hardship to the others. It is also the duty of the employer to keep surveillance over any religious harrassment against the particular section of the employees. In this regard in EEOC Vs Union Independiente de la auoridad de Acueductos(14) the court held that it is not required that the religious beliefs protected by Title VII should be in nature of acceptable ,logical,consistent or comprehensible to others.The requirements is that such belief must be of sincere.

Sexual Harassment

The Title VII of the Civil rights Acts of 1964 prohibits any kind of sex discrimination in the form of sexual harrassment in the working place whether it is in employment agencies or in labor organisations. The Act insists that there should not be any form of sexual advances, verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, request for sexual favors in the working place as it may cause adversely in one's employment. The sexual harrassment may occur in various manner .The aggrieved and the harrasser can be man or woman and the victim does not have to be the opposite sex. The harrasser can be the manager, agent, co-worker or non-employee. EEOC has the power to investigate the harrassment allegations anaysing the circumstances of the incident and nature of eth sexual advances.The case would be decided based on the case-by-case facts.(Lewis,2004)

Retaliation

The laws enforced by the EEOC, ADA, etc consist of the provision regarding the retaliation.

According to these statutes, an employer cannot scold, downgrade, harass to retaliate any person to file a charge of discrimination or to engage in discrimination proceedings. Normally retaliation occurs when an employer takes an adverse action against an individual due to his/her appointment in a protected activity. The adverse action takes place when a prson is kept under wrap from acting against the discriminatory practices or from joining an employment discrimination proceeding. The covered individuals are the persons, who are in opposition of unlawful practices and joined in discriminatory proceedings .The persons who requested for the religious accommodation related to the discrimination in their employment also considered to be covered individual for the purpose of the act. Individuals who have a close association with someone who has engaged in such protected activity also are covered individuals. The protected activity includes the opposition to a practice believed to be unlawful discrimination and Participation in an employment discrimination proceeding. A request for a reasonable religious or disability accommodation is considered a protected activity.( Guerin, 2002)(16)

In Hillig Vs Rumsfield(17) it was held that a negative referance that might affect the future job oppertunities is unlawful retaliation for bringing a race discrimination claim even without the proof that a specific job was lost because of the bad reference.

The Equal Pay Act 1963

The Act enumerates that the there should be an equal pay for all the employees in the same establishment irrespective of their gender .It is required that the job should be identical but they must be equal. The EPA entitles the employers to pay equal wages to men and women who perform jobs that require equal skill, effort and responsibility, and that are performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment.(Grofman,2004))

There can be some variations in the pay as per the nature of the work. The EPA has laid down certain rules to determine the working conditions.The skill of the employees should be measured by their experience, education, training and ability to do the work. Here the major issue is what types of skill are required for the job but not what skill they possessed. Since the effort is the amount of physical or mental exertion needed to perform the job, there can be variation in the pay. The pay can be unequal according to the degree of accountability required in performing the job, working conditions etc.Apart from this, pay differentials are permitted in the case of "affirmative defenses" such as seniority, quantity, merit or quality of production, or a factor other than sex. But it is upon the empliyer to prove that the pay is different due to such affirmative defenses.(19)

Moreover this, there is a prohibition on compensation discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability .Here it is not necessary that plaintiff's job should be considerably equal to that of a higher paid person outside the claimant's protected class, nor do these statutes require the claimant to work in the same establishment as a comparator.

In Partrice Fagen and others Vs State of Iowa and Dept. of Inspections and Appeals,(20) the court affirmed the principle that comparing jobs on the basis of skill,effort and responsibility should involve a practical judgement on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case. It is upon the employer to prove that he paid the different wages 'for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. In the case of Texas Dept of Community Affairs v, Burdine (21) the court has taken same view. The court extended the in the case Corning Glass Works, Corning Glass Works v. Brennan,(22) that it is the sole duty of the palintiff to prove that he was intentionally discriminated by the defendant..

Age Discrimination Act 1967

The employees and job applicants who are 40 years of age or older can relax the provisions against the employment discrimination based on age, under this Act. The Act specifies that it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of his/her age with respect to any term, condition, or privilege of employment, including hiring, training, benefits, promotion, layoff, compensation and job assignments. Apart from this, ADEA extends the protection in the case of apprenticeship programm, Job notices and avertisements, and Pre employment enquiries.(23)

The amended version of the ADEA (The Older Workers Benefit Protection Act of 1990 (OWBPA)) entitles the employers to provide benefits to the older employers. Normally the cost of certain benefits of the older employees is higher than that of the youger employees.Hence, the employers, in certain cases, are allowed to reduce benefits based on the age so that it would be equivalent to the younger employee's benefits. (24)

An employer can ask an employee to waive his/her rights or claims either under the ADEA to settle the matter arises of an ADEA administrative or court claim or in connection with an exit incentive program or other employment termination program but such waiver should be in writing and understandable.It should be in exchange for valuable consideration. Here the employee should be advised to consult a counsel before signing the waiver.The employer should provide at least 21 days to think over and atleast 7 days to revoke, in case he signed the waiver.The court hads laid down certain principles in number of cases based on the provisions of the Act. In Stanley L. Smith V Turner Unified School Dist. Ltd (25) the court held that the aggrieved party should establish that age is the determining factor of any adverse employment action.This view was taken in Greene v. Safeway Stores, Inc., also.(26) (Here the plaintiff should show that he is a member of the protected age group, over age 40, he is doing satisfactory work; he suffered an adverse employment action and a younger person replaced him.

The court further explained that if the plaintiff must face some major changes in employment like hiring, failing to promote reassigning different responsibilities or the decision causing some signifiacnt cahnges in benefits, he could forward an action based on adverse employment action. However, such action does not include a mere inconvenience or an alteration of job responsibilities.

Americans with Disability Act of 1990

The law relating to the equality for disabled persons directs all the employers including private,state and local governments ,labour unions,employment agencies not to take any action of discrimination against the qualified individuals with disabilities. The law further enumerates that the employers should not deny nay rights regarding the job application procedures, hiring, training compensation and any other privileges.(27) The act specifies the disabled person who has a physical or mental impairment, which may limit some life activities of such persons or the person who is regarded as having such an impairment. Here it is the duty of eth employer to provide a reasonable accommodation to the known disability of a qualified applicant or employee if it would not impose an "undue hardship" on the operation of the employer's business.He should provide any accommodation with inferior quality.

In the case of John Brennen V Mercedez Benz USA and Universal technical Intitute (28) by dismissing the appeal of the plaintiff, the court has overviewd certain aspects regarding the impairment of the employees and trainees. Here the plaintiff appealed a cases against the defendants on the basis of employment discrimination and intentional infliction of emotional distress.(29)

Here the court affirmed the provision given in the title 1 of the ADA. However, the court insisted with reference to the case McGuinness v. Univ. of N.M (30) that the aggrieved should forward feasible claim in order to meet the requirements of the provision... The provision affords the protection to the qualified individuals with the disability in the light of employment decisions. Moreover, the job training should be in such a way that each trainee can possess the job based on that training. But the training availed on the basis of sponsor ship may not allow the grieved under the purview of this act as there does not exist any employment relationship between the trainee and employer.In order to gain the status of the trainee , he should get any compensation from the employer ,moreover he should forward an application to the employer. (31)

Apart from this, the court has cleared his view of impairment in the case GTE Southwest, Inc. v. Bruce,(32) that the impairment should be in in severe form that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.So it is highly necessary that the person who moves against his employer with regard to the infringement of his disability right, should make a cursory attempt to address this deficiency.(32) (Switzer,2003)

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Sections 501 and 505)

Sec. 501 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits employment discrimination against the disabled persons in the federal sector.Sec. 505 consists the provisions regarding the remedies and attorney's fees .The commission has laid down certain policies and procedures for rehabilitating the disabled persons under vocational and veterans rehabilitation programms including the promotion of job opportunities.The policy and procedure also consists the provisions to draw the special needs of disabled employees.

The commission directs that such plans should be updated and reviewed annually to provide sufficient assurance and commitments regarding the hiring placement and advancement opportunities for the individuals with disabilities. The Act also enavble the individual who is the part of rehabilitation programm to participate in a programm of unpaid work experience in a federal agency. (33)(Lewis, Sargeant, 2004)

In Peter Potenza and Clifford Aversano Vs city of New York (34), the Supreme Court has explained the rights of the employees who are the individual of disability. The court insists that to establish the prima facie case under this Act the plaitiff must fulfill a tripartite test. The palintiff must show that he is suffering from a physical or mental impairment; secondly, it is the plaintiff's burden of proof that such impaired activity consititutes a major life activity.Thirdly he should show that the impairment substantially limits the major life activity previously identified. Apart from this, the Court cleared that such identified life activity should be of central importance to the day-to-day affairs.

For the purpose of the Act the substantially limits refers that restrictions in the ability to perform jobs as compared to other persons. In the case of Weixel v. Bd. of Ed. of the City of New York, the court clarified that an inability to do a single or particular job does not constitute a substatiantial limitation in the major life activity (35)

The Fair Labor Standards Act 1938

The Act only applies where an actual relationship between the employer and employee exists.It also includes the requirements for either individual or organization coverage are met .To satisfy this, the work should be performed in United States or a U.S. possession or territory. It cannot be applied in the absence of employer and employee relationship i.e there should be an economic bond existed between the employer and the employee. (36)

In Abdela Tum, et al Vs Barber foods Inc (37), the court explained that the employer is required to record, credit and compensate employees for all the time. Moreover, the employer requires them to work, which defined as the physical or mental exertion controlled or required by the employer and pursued for the benefit of the employer and his business.

Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations

The US equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency, was established by Title VII of the Civil rights Act 1964 and began its opertaion on July 2 1965. As mentioned above EEOC enforces six statues to eradicate the discriminatory actions in the workplace and to prvide equal employment opportunity to each naf every persons irrespective of their class and creed. The EEOC lays down the rules and regulations prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of race,color,religion,sex or national origin through the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The Age discrimination in Employment Act 1967 prohibits employment discrimination against the persons 40 years of age and older. EEOC forwards the regulations prohibiting discrimintaory action based on gender in compensation for substantially similar work. Title I and Title V of the American with Disabilities Act 1990 ensures equal employment opportunity to all the disabled persons employed in private, state or local government. The amended version the civil rights act 1991 provides monetary damages in the cases of intentioanl discrimination. Moreover, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. amended, prohibit Federal agencies from discriminating in employment against qualified individuals with disabilities and require agencies to accommodate the special needs of persons with disabilities. EEOC has laid down cerain regulations to ensure the protection against employment discrimination to certain employees who were not previously covered through the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991.

Usually the enforcement of legislations occurs through investigation; alternative methods of dispute resolution, conciliation, coordination, and regulation, litigation as well as by education, policy research, and other types of assistance.As per the President's National regulatory principles EEOC forward some regulations, which are helpful to inform employees employers their rights and duties under the various statutes. EEOC is currently considering one significant action of a regulatory nature. It has been published for public comment.There are two proposed plans introduced by the EEOC recently.

The first of the regulatory plan introduced by EEOC is the Disparate Impact Under the age discrimination in employment act.(38) The Supreme Court affirmed the aspect of disparate impact in Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228 (2005)(39) as the cognizable theory of discrimination under the ADEA. However, the court cleared that the employers can forward a defense based on reasonable factors other than age.