Workplace Prejudice Matters

The workplace discrimination usually takes place when there is inequity against the employee by the employer as regards the work-related decisions, and is inclusive of the affairs such as promotions, hiring, and firing, just to mention a few, more about it you can also read in discrimination in the workplace essay. The prejudice in the workplace covers all the concerns that are about work, and therefore, it is of importance for the employers and top management to make sure that the corporation brochure, policies, and practices are in uniformity, irrespective of gender, race, religion, disability, or age. Still, a policy that applies to all the workers may be illegal so long as it creates the harmful impacts on people in spite of the above factors.

The age discrimination takes place when there is the less favorable treatment of an applicant or employee based on the age. The issue is most familiar with the older workers as some managers usually try to force such individuals into early retirement or even decline to employ the applicants who are past a certain age limit. The Age Discrimination in the 1967’s Employment Act proscribes the bias against workers over forty years. There is also the racial discrimination which is the unfair treatment of an individual due to race, for instance, the skin color. The Title VII of the 1964’s Civil Rights Act makes it unlawful to discriminate a person based on race. Also, there is gender discrimination which is the unjust treating of a worker because of the sex, religious discrimination that involves the poor treatment of people based on their religious affiliations. Both the religious and gender prejudices are under the governance of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII (Legal Dictionary, 2017).

Diversity is the acknowledgment, appreciation, and the recognition of the individual differences regardless of age, gender, race, socioeconomic class, and ethnicity, among others. The diversity is of importance to the organizations as it promotes mutual reverence among the workers. Diversity also leads to workplace conflict resolution as the employees acknowledge their differences and realize that they are for a common objective which is quality and production. The workplace diversity can also incalculably fortify the institution’s correlation with the clients through creating a more efficient communication. The department of customer service is one of the regions where valuable contact is critical, so the representatives of customer service can pair up with the customers from their particular localities thus making them feel at home while getting the company services (Dike, 2013; Amaliyah, 2015).

One of the factors to consider when adopting a diverse staff is the business type as it plays a critical role when it comes to the decision-making. For instance, the majority of public enterprises usually employ many people in comparison to the private ones due to their sizes. For that case, appointing different workers means that the kind of the corporation will perform better with the people on board. Another factor to take into consideration when putting in place a diverse workforce is the organizational culture involving the practices such as value, people, and vision among others. A company’s belief should determine its kind of workplace diversity to consider, for example, those with a real history of having several workers should follow the same norms and beliefs so long as they have been working.

It is also of significance that the management becomes aware of the location of the company before implementing diversity in the workplace. The corporations that have branches in various regions of the globe have no option but to employ people from a mixture of cultures as every office they do operate in must have workers and the locals are always the priority. Nevertheless, some corporations that mainly work in the nations of origin can decide whether or not to have a culturally diverse workforce as their locations do not favor them (Dike, 2013).

Racial Discrimination in the Workplace

Introduction

In the current world of changing times, organizations and other profit-making companies are striving to remain at the top of the very competitive market. The firms are doing this by ensuring that they get updated with the current events in their field and fully satisfy their customers. Despite the knowledge that human resource is the most important department in any business, some companies have resorted to restructuring their personnel to eliminate those workers they consider not useful in their efforts of attaining their set goals (Tanja et al. 92-95). In doing this, these organizations have gotten accused of using unorthodox means to select the employees to leave them when the need for restructuring arises. Some of the mechanisms they use include the age of the employee, the race, and background of the worker and competence and skills. Experts in the human resource department have criticized these techniques by arguing that they are discriminative. This essay will discuss one case where workers accused a company they worked for of racially discriminating against them. It will explain the incident, highlight why the petitioners felt neglected or racially discriminated and how they can get compensated as well as how this can get prevented from reoccurring in the future

The Incident

On September 7, 2017, USNews reported that a U.S construction company in the name of JL Schwieters Construction operating in Hugo, Minnesota was ordered to settle its two former workers by paying them a sum of $125,000 (The Associated Press Par.2). JL Schwieters is supply, building and Construction Company based in Minnesota and has employed a lot of workers. The reason for this was the fact that the employees had taken the company to court and accused it of racially discriminating against them when they were working for the company. The petitioners in the case argued that during their time in the business, they got subjected to racial discrimination by being subjected to an unfriendly work setting including threats and abuse because they were blacks. They also posited that during their employment with the company where they worked as carpenters, the supervisor would call them derogatory names pointing to their skin color. Dion Pye and Willie Staple also argued that the white supervisor threatened to hang them using a noose made out of an electrical wire (The Associated Press Par.3). This case shows that black-Americans still experience problems of racially getting discriminated in U.S. Racial discrimination in employment is also rife in the country and affects many people. The judge, in this case, ordered the company to settle the workers by paying damages up to the tune of over 125,000 USD. It argued in its order that the organization should train all its workers (supervisors and employees) on federal harassment and discrimination laws governing their operations in the country. Therefore, from this incident, one can see that the issue of racial discrimination has not been dealt with entirely in the U.S. labor market.

Why the Employees Felt the Company treated them unfairly

In the case, Dion Pye and Willie Staple strongly felt that their mistreatment by the supervisor was purely based on their race or skin complexion. For instance, they said that the manager used to refer to them using derogatory names some of which could be interpreted to relate to their skin color. He in several occasions threatened the workers of death by hanging, a fact that made their working in the company untenable. Ideally, one needs a very conducive and stable environment to be able to discharge his or her duties efficiently. That was not the case in the organization since the two employees worked under intense pressure, intimidation, threats, and abuse from the white supervisor. The manager would, for instance, threaten them of hanging if they did not work as he pleased. Such actions made them feel unwanted by getting mistreated. Also, the fact that the judge ordered the company to pay them damages of thousands of dollars means that he got convinced that the supervisor did commit an offence of mistreatment.

Were the Employees being Treated Unfairly?

In my honest opinion, the two employees were maltreated by the supervisor and the primary basis being their race. The first reason as to why I believe so is because of my own experiences in the workplace. Most black-Americans in the place where I work have complained continuously about harassment and discrimination by their white counterparts. Secondly, the supervisor intimidates the workers by issuing constant threats to them, a fact that might have led to their leaving. Third, the judge got convinced that the two workers got racially discriminated and in this case, I trust that he considered all the available evidence before him (The Associated Press Par. 4-5). The fact that he ordered for their resettlement by the organization means that they deserved compensation for their maltreatment. Finally, the 20th century America has witnessed several cases of racial discrimination when it comes to employment practices and only most human resource departments have gotten sensitized on the need to be inclusive and follow the stricter regulations laid down to fight the vice. Therefore, I believe that the treatment of the two workers by the firm’ supervisor was unfair.

How to compensate them

The judge has already found out mechanisms to compensate the workers for the discrimination as laid down by the applicable laws. For instance, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission follows the set down rules and regulations to rule on cases related to racism or any other form of discrimination. In this case, since the commission found the company culpable, it deems it fit to award the two workers a sum of $125,000 as damages. I think the company should also be compelled to apologize to them in efforts to heal the rift. In future, stricter laws against racial discrimination need to be put in place to ensure that companies like JL Schwieters desist from racially discriminating against their workers.

Preventing the Problem from Re-Occurring

With the proper restructuring of the company’s management, it will be able to avoid cases like this from reoccurring in the future. As already stated above, strict adherence to the laws and regulations governing the conduct of firms will cut down on the occurrence of such issues. Additionally, the council should also find mechanisms to ensure that all companies operating in the U.S. train their managers and workers on federal harassment and discrimination laws as this will help in preventing the reoccurrence of cases like this one.

Conclusion

Some decisions made by companies may be received negatively by the people affected and even by the other employees. Such actions could deal a significant blow to the company. For instance, mistreating workers based on their race does not add any value to a company but instead, results in repercussions like lawsuits and subsequent fines. Therefore, companies should do their research well before taking a significant step. Leaders should thus avoid any discrimination as this could cost the company a lot.