Need a Legal Writer - Bluebook

Running Head: THESIS STATEMENT

Thesis Statement and Outline

Liberty University

Introduction

In order to provide equal opportunity to all in employment, organizations should ensure

their recruitment strategy is inclusive of persons from every race, creed, gender, religion, not

2

THESIS STATEMENT

limited to the disabled, because The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces

Federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. These laws protect employees and job

applicants against employment discrimination.[1]

Thesis Statement

While recruiting to increase inclusion and diversity might be a noble goal, however, an

organization that is ill-prepared to adopt an inclusive culture in hiring and acclimation can be an

expensive and harrowing path to a short-tenured employee. According to the Gallup

Organization, 45% of U.S. workers have experienced some form of discrimination in the past 12

months [2]. It has been found that decisions made and executed by diverse and inclusive teams

delivered 60% better results [3] Inclusive teams make better business decisions up to 87% of the

time. Id. Armed with this understanding, inclusion and diversity is not always about ethnicity,

disability, or gender. Certainly, viewpoints have shifted over the course of time, but there

continues to be unfairness in hiring that is not too often focused on, which is age discrimination.

The age-old question, no pun intended, is why so many persons aged 40 and up experience issues

in the job search, when they often bring a wealth of experience and other valuable skills? There

are a number of stereotypes that permeated such as learning curve with technology, higher

compensation, stamina, and even lack of flexibility, all of which are untrue a majority of the

time. It is these dangerous and misguided assumptions that prevent hiring managers from seeing

the “plug and play” value in seasoned professional who need very little hand holding and is

reliable.

The Legal Doctrine Regarding EEOC Compliance

Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the law that

accomplished enforcement of the constitutional right to vote, but to also provide jurisdiction to

the US district courts to give relief due to discrimination in public places, and protect the God

given constitutional rights as well in public education and other federal subsidized programs

against discrimination. The EEOC was created to enforce this Act to prevent discrimination in

employment.

Historical Background EEOC Laws

Under the oversight of the US Department of Justice, the commission known as the Equal

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was created to combat various forms of discrimination in the

workplace, as a part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with limited scope of power to actually

make employers accountable for such unfair practices.

It took eight-years for significant change, when the 92nd Congress provided the EEOC

power to sue employers, which gave the agency an opportunity to effectively hold violators

accountable. Since the early 70’s the EEOC has stayed the course in taking aggressive actions in

thoroughly investigating alleged employers who have been accused of acts of discrimination in

their hiring and or treatment in the workplace, with success even at the US Supreme Court level.

The EECO is not exclusive to suing companies, it is also responsible for informing both the

public and employers about discriminatory practices.

As defined by the EEOC, “to discriminate” is to treat that person differently, or less

favorably, for some reason.[4] The act of discrimination takes hold when an employer

3

THESIS STATEMENT

effectively causes a disadvantage to a potential candidate for hire or a current employee based on

any of the following; age, gender, race, religion or disability to mention only a few, which none

of these characteristics would hinder ones ability to meet the minimum requirements or perform

the roles and responsibilities of their job. unless you have a bona fide reason, such as a DOT

driver would need to be able to have vision to perform the work, and a disability of sight

impairment/blindness.

At the heart of the EEOC, the initial focus was largely on racial discrimination with

landmark cases such as Griggs v Duke Power Co. that was decided at the US Supreme Court that

paved the way for what is known as disparate treatment. [5] Throughout the years the EEOC has

since evolved to include other areas of discrimination such as protections for pregnant women

and for persons over the age of 40, which is the focus of this thesis.

The importance of this agency from its beginning in the crux of social change and violent

unrest was a clarion call for justice and equality. In the early 80’s political pressure was applied

and the EEOC who once had a great number of “large class” cases, began to scale back cases for

individuals and handle these complainants at the local level.

By the early 90’s the EEOC began to enforce the AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF

1990 (ADA) signed into law by President G.H. Bush on July 26, 1990. This new legislation

provided yet another avenue for the EEOC to make employers accountable in regard to their

hiring standards and practices, as well as being a resource to further educate about discrimination

as it effects the workplace.[6]

Cases, Regulations and Statues Related to the EEOC

Dealing with the realities of ageism in the workplace and ingrained in corporate culture

and hiring practices, age discrimination is an inconvenient and disturbing truth. The ADEA

prohibits employment discrimination against persons 40 years of age or older. THE AGE

DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1967, [7]

Roughly two-thirds of workers in the US between the age of 40-70, have witnessed or

experienced themselves some form of ageism in the workplace. The risks are even higher for

ageism should you work in an industry such as “big-tech” or “entertainment” sector.

The federal government had its own recent challenge in the US Supreme Court case of

Babb v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs when Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion with Justice

Thomas, the only one dissenting in a recent case of age discrimination.[8]

Noris Babb, worked for the VA Medical Center located in Bay Pines, FL for 16 years as

a clinical pharmacist. During her tenure she considered to be a high-performing employee who

was certified to practice disease management, having a case load of patients and wrote scripts as

well without an attending physician based on the attorney of the plaintiff. However, Babb

contends that 10 years earlier she and other colleagues began to notice a pattern of being passed

over for advance positions with higher compensations, which were being filled by a majority of

men in their early 30’s. Babb and her colleagues were all 45 years old or greater. [9] In the end,

the US Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision ruled in favor of Babb and the EEOC, that the federal

law protects even federal employees from age discrimination, and that Congress had

4

THESIS STATEMENT

purposefully extended more protection to federal employees versus employees in the private

sector, local and state level agencies. Id.

A recent settlement was reached in another EEOC age discrimination case against

Burrow Global Services, LLC based in Houston, is an engineering and construction firm serving

the petrochemical sector. The plaintiff in this case claimed that they were terminated based on

his age.

Based on the suit filed, the plaintiff was a senior electrical designer, greater than 60 years

of age and newly managed by an individual much younger. According to the suit, “Almost

immediately, the new supervisor began making comments about retirement and repeatedly

asking the employee when he planned to retire”[10] The EEOC in their suit on behalf of the

plaintiff charged that the new manager then decided to terminate the plaintiff and preceded to

hire someone much younger as a backfill. Id.

The alleged conduct of the manager at Burrow Global Services, LLC is a direct violation

of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), that prohibits discrimination on the

basis of age. Id. The EEOC initially tried to resolve this matter through the process of

administrative conciliation, however when that effort failed it was then filed in the US District

Court for the Southern District of Texas. Id.

On March 26, 2021, under a 3-year consent decree, the respondent will pay the plaintiff

the amount of $50,960 in back compensation and damages, plus roll out training regarding the

law and policies related to the ADEA. Id. One of many examples of discriminatory practices in

regard to age.

Review of Standing Literature and Scholarship on the EEOC

According to the Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal, Why the EEOC (Still)

Matter, it covers the bold but empty beginnings of the agency having started on July 2, 1965, in

an office that was repurposed by the Department of Commerce, and honestly having no real span

of control or power to enforce any part of Title VII. [11]

Under the Civil Rights Act the onslaught of legislative wrangling that it was born from,

gave authority to the EEOC to do several things such as investigate and conciliate discrimination

charges, conduct technical studies and assistance, but fell short of the ability to sue employers

who are in violation of the law. Basically, no real accountability at this point. However, their

authoritative reach to be able to sue came years later in 1972, giving the EEOC the power to not

only investigate but sue employers as well. Id.

It is evident that forms of discrimination will always remain because you are dealing with

the most complexed of creation, and that is a human. It is evident that the various forms of

employment discrimination is alive and well across every sector or enterprise in the US

workforce. Year over year, claims of racial, ageism, disability, and or gender discrimination

floods the agencies by the tens of thousands. It begs the question, are we taking the right

approach or are we missing something in this fight for equality in the workplace? As complaints

are on the rise, we are approaching 60 years of this legislation, and are we even better for it right

5

THESIS STATEMENT

now? A large majority of claims are closed without further consideration or for administrative

reasons, upwards to 80% of the initial complaints. The fact remains, that the “EEOC is the only

federal agency responsible for receiving and processing charges of unlawful employment

discrimination - and the only agency responsible for investigating these complaints and

conciliating them.” Id.

The EEOC plays a key role in providing a vital public service by monitoring and

measuring the number of complaints year over year, identifying the types of complaints,

performing data analysis and uses this data to understand the trends in each category of

discrimination practices that tend to permeate within the workplace.

Although a lengthy process, it is necessary to thoroughly investigate these complaints as

they are highly charged and of great seriousness. When an individual decides to level a charge or

complaint against a company, it is not taken lightly and there are times when other events have

failed to be reported. Id. The EEOC is an agency who serves on behalf of the public interest, that

maintains the goal of eradicating discriminatory practices in hiring and within the workforce.

Instead,"[w]hen the EEOC acts, albeit at the behest of and for the benefit of specific individuals,

it acts also to vindicate the public interest in preventing employment discrimination.'' [12]

The Overall View of the Debate

The employee is the lifeblood to every business, as you cannot serve your customers or

clients without them. Employees come from various walks of life, armed with diverse skills and

experiences that improves productivity which translates to the bottom-line. The purpose of the

EEOC is to ensure that employers are treating every candidate who meet the minimum

requirements of the role fairly in the hiring process as well as current employees within the

workforce.

If someone lacks the skills to perform a job they applied for, then yes the employer has

the right to decline the candidate based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities. For example, if a

position requires a degree in Accounting and five years of experience, and the applicant has no

college degree and no experience, this candidate is unqualified. The focus for the EEOC is to

reduce and educate the public concerning the laws in place on workplace and hiring

discrimination.

Age discrimination, which is more prevalent than ever before, is also about when

employers are posting jobs that indicate an age range or targeting a particular group for example

“18-25” or “New College Grad” are ways to target younger candidates but also discriminating

against candidates who are 40 years and older. Structural biases in promotions are also ways to

discriminate, against older workers as well.

Biblical Worldview Application of the Debate

6

THESIS STATEMENT

Bibliography

[1] EMPLOYERS (July 18, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/employers

[2] BUILD A CULTURE WHERE EVERY EMPLOYEE CAN USE THEIR VOICE,

https://www.gallup.com/workplace/215939/diversity-inclusion.aspx

[3] ERIC LARSON, NEW RESEARCH: DIVERSITY + INCLUSION = BETTER DECISION MAKING AT

WORK (2017), https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriklarson/2017/09/21/new-research-diversity-

inclusion-better-decision-making-at-work/#6459bbc4cbfa

[4] WHAT IS EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION (Aug. 7, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/youth/what-

employment-discrimination

[5] GRIGGS V DUKE POWER CO., https://www.britannica.com/event/Griggs-v-Duke-Power-Co (

Aug. 7, 2021)

[6] AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/ada ( Aug.

7, 2021)

[7] THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1967, https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/age-

discrimination-employment-act-1967?_ga=2.269248819.310187299.1628479248-

1075987091.1628479247 ( Aug. 7, 2021)

[8] BABB V. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, S. CT. (2020) (, J., CONCURRING)

[9] Nina Totenberg , SUPREME COURT HANDS FEDERAL WORKER MAJOR WIN IN AGE

DISCRIMINATION CASE, https://www.npr.org/2020/04/06/828052688/supreme-court-hands-

federal-worker-partial-win-in-age-discrimination-case ( Apr. 6, 2020)

[10] BURROW GLOBAL TO PAY $50,960 TO SETTLE EEOC AGE DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT,

https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/burrow-global-pay-50960-settle-eeoc-age-discrimination-

lawsuit ( Mar. 29, 2021)

[11] Anne Noel Occhialino & Daniel Vaile , WHY THE EEOC (STILL) MATTER,

https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=hlelj (last

visited )

[12] GENERAL TELEPHONE, 446 U.S. AT 326.