human resource

Read "The 'ICE' Strategy" on Human Resource Management (pp. 8–9) of the PDF in Aetna: Investing In Diversity Case. Also review Exhibits 6 and 7 on pp. 22–23 of the case study to see the link between Aetna's strategic focus and the diversity outcomes that can result. From Exhibit 7, select one of the eight strategic focuses and one of the 10 diversity implications that you feel relates to that focus.

(This is the Discussion Post) Discuss the relationship between the two and describe three specific actions Aetna could take to accomplish the diversity implication. Include at least one citation and reference in your initial post.

Respond to at least two of your classmates' posts concerning their choices and suggested actions. Can you add anything to their perspective? ( I will send the classmates post later)

Refer to the Discussion Rubric ( I have attached rubric please pay attention to it )for directions on completing these discussions.

.1586517

Changing National Values

The United States was founded on the principles of individual merit, hard work, and equality. In spite of these values, employment discrimination has a long history in the United States. Organizations that claim to offer fair treatment to employees have intentionally or unintentionally engaged in discriminatory practices. As a result, laws have been passed to ensure equality and reward individual merit and hard work.

Small Business Application

The Perils of Noncompliance

Owners and managers of growing small businesses should consider conducting routine HR compliance assessments, either annually or perhaps each time the company reaches another significant increase in employees, for example, from less than 5 to closer to 15 employees.

There are other occasions when a small firm should check its compliance as well. Eric A. Marks, a partner in charge of the Human Resources Consulting Practice at the New York accounting firm Marks Paneth & Shron, explains:

Significant changes to the business, such as mergers; the retirement of senior managers; newly hired or promoted supervisors or managers who may lack HR experience; creation or revision of an employee handbook; changes in employee morale, turnover, attendance, or disciplinary problems; taking on government contracts where compliance requirements are often stricter; and major changes in state or federal regulations—any of these are danger signs. They signal that the business has a fresh need to address compliance and make sure its house is in order.

In short, an HR compliance assessment reviews how well an employer is following employment, benefits, and safety laws. Fortunately, small-business owners do not have to remain in the danger zone. There are numerous HR consulting firms that not only can conduct a compliance assessment, but can also assist the owner with rectifying any noncompliant systems and procedures and train the company’s managers and supervisors to maintain them. There are even HR compliance self-assessment forms available online. Help is only a mouse-click away.

Source: “New Risks to Small Businesses” Marketwire (February 28, 2011), http://www2.marketwire.com; “HR Compliance Assessment Overview,” http://www.the-arnold-group.com/hr-assessment.cfm; “HR Challenges: Compliance,” http://www.strategic-workplace-solutions.com/services/compliance.

Figure 3.2 shows the various prohibited HR activities related to hiring, promoting, compensating employees, and so forth covered by EEO laws. If you think you already know what constitutes a legal or illegal employment practice, you might be surprised. Highlights in HRM 1 will test your current understanding of how equal employment opportunity laws are applied in the workplace.

Figure 3.2

Prohibited Discriminatory Employment Practices

Highlights in HRM 1

Test Your Knowledge of Equal Employment Opportunity Law

The following questions have been used as “icebreakers” by employers and consultants when training supervisors and managers in EEO legislation. What is your knowledge of EEO laws?

· 1.

Two male employees tell a sexually explicit joke. The joke is overheard by a female employee who complains to her supervisor that this is sexual harassment. Is her complaint legitimate?

Answer

Yes

No

· 2.

To be covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, an employer must be engaged in interstate commerce and employ 25 or more employees.

Answer

True

False

· 3.

People addicted to illegal drugs are classified as disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

Answer

Yes

No

· Answer4.

The Equal Pay Act of 1963 allows employers to pay different wages to men and women who are performing substantially similar work. What are the three defenses for paying a different wage?

1. Merit

2. seniority

3. incentive pay plans

· 5.

A person applies for a job as a janitor at your company. During his interview with you, the person mentions that since birth he has sometimes experienced short periods of memory loss. Must you consider this individual a disabled person under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990?

Answer

Yes

No

· 6.

On Friday afternoon, you tell Nancy Penley, a computer analyst, that she must work overtime the next day. She refuses, saying that Saturday is her regular religious holiday and she can’t work. Do you have the legal right to order her to work on Saturday?

Answer

Yes

Rationale

if no reasonable accommodation can be made

No

· 7.

You have just told an applicant that she will not receive the job for which she applied. She claims that you denied her employment because of her age (she’s 52). You claim she is not protected under the age discrimination law. Is your reasoning correct?

Answer

Yes

No

· 8.

As an employer, you can select those applicants who are the most qualified in terms of education and experience.

Answer

Yes

Rationale

except if under a court order

No

· 9.

As a manager, you have the legal right to mandate dates for pregnancy leaves.

Answer

True

False

· 10.

State and local fair employment practice laws cover smaller employers not covered by federal legislation.

Answer

True

False

3.2aMajor Federal Laws

Major federal EEO laws have been enacted to prevent discrimination against groups of workers most often affected by unfair employment practices. These groups are referred to as  protected classes . (See Figure 3.3).

Figure 3.3Protected Classes of Employees

Defined broadly, the classes include employees of a particular race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, and those with physical or mental disabilities. Figure 3.4 lists the major and separate federal laws and their provisions governing equal employment opportunity.

Figure 3.4

Major Laws Affecting Equal Employment Opportunity

Equal Pay Act of 1963

The Equal Pay Act makes it illegal to discriminate against people in terms of the pay, employee benefits, and pension they earn based on their gender when they do equal work. Jobs are considered “equal” when they require substantially the same skill, effort, and responsibility under similar working conditions and in the same establishment. However, a company does not violate the Equal Pay Act when the differences in the wages it pays to men and women for equal work are based on seniority systems, merit considerations, or the workers’ quantity or quality of production. Also, if a pay disparity between the sexes exists, employers cannot legally lower the wages of one gender to comply with the law; rather, they must raise the wages of the gender being underpaid.

4. Joint labor-management committees that govern apprenticeship or training programs

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, employers are permitted limited exemptions from antidiscrimination regulations if the employment preferences are based on a bona fide occupational qualification. A  bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ)  permits discrimination when employer hiring preferences are a reasonable necessity for the normal operation of the business. Courts have ruled that a  business necessity  is a practice that is necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the organization.

However, a BFOQ is a suitable defense against a discrimination charge only when age, religion, sex, or national origin is an actual qualification for performing the job. (See Figures 3.5). For example, an older person could legitimately be excluded from consideration for employment as a model for teenage designer jeans. It is also reasonable to expect the Chicago Bears of the National Football League to hire male locker-room attendants or for Abercrombie and Fitch Clothing Store to employ females as models for women’s fashions. Religion is a BFOQ in organizations that require employees to share a particular religious doctrine. National origin can also be a BFOQ if it is an actual qualification for a job. For example, to ensure the “authenticity” of the dining experience, an Asian restaurant could use the business-necessity defense to support its preference for hiring Asian American servers. The BFOQ exception does not, however, apply to discrimination based on race or color.

Figure 3.5BFOQ Bona Fide Occupational Qualification

Religious Preference.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination based on a person’s religion. Title VII does not require employers to grant complete religious freedom in employment situations, however. Employers need only make a reasonable accommodation for a current employee’s or job applicant’s religious observance or practice without incurring undue hardship in the conduct of the business. Managers or supervisors may have to accommodate an employee’s religion in the specific areas of

1. holidays and observances (scheduling),

2. personal appearance (wearing beards, veils, or turbans), and

3. religious conduct on the job (missionary work among other employees).

What constitutes “reasonable accommodation” can be difficult to define. For example, in the 2012 case, Porter v. City of Chicago, the city of Chicago had tried to resolve scheduling conflicts with Latice Porter by offering an evening shift to appease her request for time off on Sundays for religious reasons. However, she wasn’t interested in this option and didn’t return to work. She was later fired for not fulfilling work responsibilities. She sued the city based on discrimination against her religion. The City of Chicago won the case. Reasonable accommodation doesn’t mean an employer must accommodate at all costs, rather it is meant as a possible benefit to the employee.

Zurijeta/ Shutterstock.com

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (2009).

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

The act requires employers to make a reasonable accommodation for disabled people who are otherwise qualified to work, unless doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer. “Undue hardship” refers to unusual work modifications or excessive expenses that might be incurred by an employer in providing an accommodation.  Reasonable accommodation  “includes making facilities accessible and usable to disabled persons, restructuring jobs, permitting part-time or modified work schedules, reassigning to a vacant position, changing equipment, and/or expense.” An example of a reasonable accommodation case is that of Minnihan v. Mediacom Communications (2015). Minnihan had a seizure disorder that barred him from driving—an essential part of his job. Mediacom offered as many accommodations as possible, such as a nondriving job in another facility, contact information of an employee who could give Minnihan a ride to work, and information on public transportation. However, Minnihan didn’t accept any of these suggestions and requested that Mediacom hire another employee to perform the driving portion of his job—but Mediacom rejected this idea. Mediacom was found to have provided reasonable accommodation.

The ADA prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals regarded as having physical or mental disabilities.

ESB Professional/Shutterstock

Furthermore, employers cannot use selection procedures that screen out or tend to screen out disabled people unless the selection procedure “is shown to be job-related for the position in question and is consistent with business necessity” and acceptable job performance cannot be achieved through reasonable accommodation. Information and forms related to the health of employees must be kept confidential and separate from their regular personnel files.

Hiring disabled individuals is not only a legal mandate, it is also good business. Employers subject to the ADA and those who value the varied skills and abilities of the disabled approach the law as a proactive business requirement. Hiring the disabled emphasizes what these individuals can do rather than what they cannot do. Two of the most comprehensive studies conducted on the ADA show that the law has had a positive effect on both business outcomes and disabled employees. Conducted by the National Council on Disability (NCD), the studies reported positive gains regarding the ADA’s four major goals: equal opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for people with disabilities. Figure 3.6 identifies specific ways to make the workplace more accessible to the disabled.

Figure 3.6

Americans with Disabilities Act Suggestions for an Accessible Workplace

Amendments to the ADA

The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act was enacted in 2008 in response to court rulings that had weakened the ADA. The ADAAA broadened the definition of what constitutes a disability. The new act makes it less likely a person will be denied protection because his or her condition does not seem severe enough or because it is improved by drugs, prosthetic devices, and so forth.

After the passage of the law, the EEOC filed a number of suits against companies including one that alleged that a longtime cashier with severe arthritis was denied a reasonable accommodation—a stool. The woman had used the stool for 7 years, but a new manager did not like the fact and had terminated her.

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) enacted in 2008 was passed to alleviate people’s fears that their genetic information would be misused. Under Title II of the act, employers are prohibited from requesting, requiring, or purchasing the genetic information of workers or their family members. Employers that happen to possess genetic information as a result of health insurance records must keep the information confidential and separate from an employee’s personnel files.

In 2016, this act was supported with the decision in the EEOC v. Joy Mining Machinery case, where the employer was denied the ability to make post-offer medical examinations in asking prospective employees if they had family medical history of tuberculosis, cancer, epilepsy, and heart disease.

Executive orders are used to provide equal employment opportunity to individuals employed by government contractors. Since many large employers—such as General Dynamics, Intel, Dell Computer, and Motorola—and numerous small companies have contracts with the federal government, managers are expected to know and comply with the provisions of executive orders and other laws. The federal laws and executive orders that apply to government agencies and government contractors are summarized in Figure 3.7.

Figure 3.7

EEO Rules Applicable to Federal Contractors and Agencies

Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973

The Vocational Rehabilitation Act was passed in 1973 and required private employers with federal contracts over $2,500 to take action to hire individuals with a mental or physical disability. Recipients of federal financial assistance, such as public and private colleges and universities, are also covered. In applying the safeguards of this law, the term  disabled individual  means “any person who

1. has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person’s major life activities,

2. has a record of such an impairment, or

3. is regarded as having such an impairment.”

Also, employment is not required when some aspect of the employee’s disability prevents that person from carrying out essential parts of the job, nor is it required if the disabled person is not otherwise qualified.

In cases when people with contagious diseases are “otherwise qualified” to do their jobs, the law requires employers to make a reasonable accommodation to allow the disabled to perform their jobs. Individuals with AIDS or HIV are also disabled within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act. However, the Rehabilitation Act does not require employers to hire or retain a disabled person if he or she has a contagious disease that poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others and the individual cannot be accommodated.

Executive Order 11246

Federal agencies and government contractors with contracts of $10,000 or more must comply with the antidiscrimination provisions of Executive Order 11246. The order prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in all employment activities. Furthermore, it requires that government contractors or subcontractors having 50 or more employees with contracts in excess of $50,000 develop affirmative action plans; such plans will be discussed later in the chapter.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010.

On September 20, 2011, the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act was implemented to end the ban on gay, lesbian, or bisexual persons openly serving in the U.S. military.

3.2cFair Employment Practice Laws

In addition to federal laws and executive orders, almost all states and many local governments have passed laws barring employment discrimination. Referred to as  fair employment (practices (FEPs) , these statutes are often more comprehensive than the federal laws.

3.3Other Equal Employment Opportunity Issues

Federal laws, executive orders, court cases, and state and local statutes provide the broad legal framework; and within these major laws, specific issues are of particular interest to supervisors and managers.

3.3aSexual Harassment

Sexual harassment  refers to unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. It can also include offensive remarks, vulgar or obscene gestures, language or comments, related to one’s sex, an individuals body, or sexual activity. Both the victim and the harasser can be either female or male, and harassment can occur between individuals of the same or opposite sex. The harasser can be the victim’s supervisor, a supervisor in another area, a coworker, or someone who is not an employee of the employer, such as a client or customer.

The EEOC recognizes two forms of sexual harassment as being illegal under Title VII. The first, quid pro quo harassment, occurs when “submission to or rejection of sexual conduct is used as a basis for employment decisions.” This type of harassment involves a tangible or economic consequence, such as a demotion or loss of pay. If a supervisor promotes an employee only after the person agrees to an after-work date, the conduct is clearly illegal.

The second type of harassment, hostile environment, can occur when unwelcome sexual conduct “has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with job performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.”

Sexual harassment includes any type of behavior, comments, gestures, and actions of a sexual nature that create a hostile work environment for an employee.

Photographee.eu/Shutterstock

Dirty jokes, vulgar slang, nude pictures, swearing, and personal ridicule and insult create a hostile environment when an employee finds them offensive. Email, instant and text messages, and posts on social networking sites have become convenient ways for employees to sexually harass their coworkers electronically.

Via a questionnaire, it is possible to test the understanding of your employees about what is and what is not sexual harassment. Highlights in HRM 2 shows some sample questions firms can ask their employees to gauge their knowledge of the topic.

Highlights in HRM 2

Questions Used to Audit Sexual Harassment in the Workplace

The EEOC considers an employer guilty of sexual harassment when the employer knew or should have known about the unlawful conduct and failed to remedy it or to take corrective action. Employers are also guilty of sexual harassment when they allow nonemployees (customers or salespeople) to sexually harass employees. When charges of sexual harassment have been proved, victims forced out of their jobs can be awarded back pay, lost benefits, attorney’s fees, and interest charges, and they may be reinstated in their jobs. Sexual harassment involving physical conduct can invite criminal charges, and punitive damages can be assessed against both the employer and the individual offender.

3.3bSexual Orientation

Nearly half of U.S. states and some cities also have passed laws prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in workplaces. Although Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 lists “sex” as a protected class, currently no federal law bars discrimination based on one’s sexual orientation. For lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) employees who do not work for the federal government, protection from discrimination largely comes from fair employment practice laws passed at state and local levels. The laws vary regarding the protection afforded to the LGBTQ community and those who are covered under the laws. For example, in some states, public—but not private—sector employees are protected from discrimination based on their sexual orientation. Therefore, it becomes important for managers and supervisors to know and follow the legal rights of the LGBTQ community in their geographic area. Figure 3.8 shows a list of states that have passed non-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation.

Figure 3.8States with Laws Prohibiting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination

· Harassing an employee because of his or her sexual orientation, for example, by derogatory terms, sexually oriented comments, or disparaging remarks for associating with a person of the same or opposite sex.

In 2007, the EEOC issued new enforcement guidelines to help prevent discrimination against workers with caregiving responsibilities. There are no federal statutes that prohibit discrimination based “solely” on a person being a caregiver. However, disparate treatment arises when an employee with caregiving responsibilities is subjected to discrimination based on a protected characteristic under equal opportunity laws (such as sex, race, age). The EEOC has outlined numerous scenarios it says could constitute discrimination against a caregiver. Denying women with young children an employment opportunity available to men with young children is an example. So is refusing to hire a worker who is a single parent of a child with a disability based on the assumption that caregiving responsibilities will make the worker unreliable.