Search results

Globally, jurisdictions have made several attempts to eliminate and minimize discrimination in employment. These include moral suasion, social justice arguments, business case arguments, and legislative enactments. Whilst the former has had limited success, the passage of legislation has proved instrumental, not only in containing the perpetration of discrimination based on protected grounds but also in increasing awareness of the disadvantages which result from the disparate treatment meted out to persons as a result of their immutable characteristics. Disabilities are one such grounds. Where legislation exists, it typically prohibits disparate treatment in relation to persons with disabilities in the areas of employment, education, and the provision of goods and services. This chapter analyses a sample of discrimination cases, with claimants who have alleged discrimination based on their diagnosis of autism or a related disorder within the autism spectrum. These cases are within the United Kingdom and have been decided by Employment Tribunals in England. The cases and decisions are held at the office of the Employment Tribunal Service in Suffolk and are accessible via their online repository. The sample of Tribunal cases presented here relate to various employment practices within British workplaces.

This editorial aims to introduce the special issue on employment discrimination against immigrants.

The first part is a commentary on key issues in the study of employment discrimination against immigrants. The second part presents the five articles in the special issue.

The papers in this special issue focus on a variety of issues associated with employment discrimination against immigrants. For example, they consider: discrimination based on accents; differences among justice perceptions among immigrants and non‐immigrants; the effects of negative stereotypes on workplace outcomes; the treatment of Hispanic immigrants; and the reasons for the lack of research on Hispanic immigrants.

The author comments on key issues that researchers of employment discrimination against immigrants have to take into account. These issues include: the appreciation of the diversity among immigrants; an understanding of the complexity of employment discrimination research; openness to cross‐disciplinary approaches; and the consideration of employment discrimination within the context of the immigrant experience. The five articles that make up the special issues vary in their nature (empirical, critical), methodologies (quantitative, qualitative), locations (United States, Germany, and Canada), and implications.

The issues discussed in the papers have important implications for understanding and overcoming employment discrimination against immigrants.

The Journal of Managerial Psychology invited this special issue to initiate psychological research on employment discrimination against immigrants. The intent is to draw the attention of organizational scholars to the large, yet under‐studied immigrant segment of the workforce.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.

The article aims to provide a discussion of societal norms concerning “attractiveness,” the existence of appearance discrimination in employment, the presence of “preferring the pretty”, and then the authors examine important civil rights laws that relate to such forms of discrimination. Finally, the authors apply ethical theories to determine whether such discrimination can be seen as moral or immoral.

It is a legal paper which covers all the laws related to discrimination based on look. Court cases and Americans laws related to this concept are reviewed and critically discussed.

The paper finds that appearance‐based discrimination is not illegal in the USA so long as it does not violate civil rights laws.

This research is limited to Federal and State laws in the USA and may not be relevant in other countries as the local laws might vary.

Managers and employees can protect themselves in the workplace from illegal discriminatory practices.

Employees know their rights and enhance their understanding of laws related to appearance, attractiveness, and why companies look to hire those who are considered “handsome”, “pretty” and “beautiful”.

This is an original and comprehensive paper by the authors.

This study aims to examine whether the demographics of the US federal judiciary and the type of employment discrimination charge influence federal employment discrimination case outcomes.

The outcomes of 401 randomly selected employment discrimination cases were examined by utilizing chi square analysis to test the interaction effects of race and gender along with four different charges of employment discrimination.

The findings suggest that the outcomes of employment discrimination cases are a function of the interaction of the judges' gender and race along with the type of discrimination charge (e.g. gender, race, age, or disability discrimination) involved in the case.

More research studies with larger cell sample sizes for certain discrimination claims should be conducted to ascertain the validity of the current results.

Potential litigants in employment discrimination cases (both plaintiffs and defendants) may find these results relevant in determining their chances for success in the courtroom.

These findings could help judges become more aware of potential biases and help guard against being influenced by them. These findings may also have implications for the selection and appointment of judges and suggest that judicial bodies that are more diverse may render more unbiased rulings.

Previous research regarding the influence of the sex and race of the judge on court case outcomes has yielded contradictory and confusing findings. However, by controlling for the possible influence of the type of charge involved in the cases, the findings of the current study suggest that judges' rulings are a function of the interaction of the judges' demographic characteristics with the type of discrimination charge.

The purpose of this paper is to use a risk management perspective to identify the risks of employment discrimination law liability for multinational employers.

Data from 101 US Federal Court cases that involved multinational employers operating both inside and outside of the USA were content coded and then used to identify factors that predict the frequency that foreign employers operating inside the USA – and US employers operating outside the USA – were subject to lawsuits under US employment discrimination laws.

This study found that employment lawsuits based on sex discrimination against females was the most significant risk exposure. Employers whose home country was from a Western culture were at comparatively greater risk for charges of both age and religious discrimination. Employers whose home country was from an Asian culture were at comparatively greater risk for charges of both race and national origin discrimination.

This study demonstrates the viability and usefulness of a risk management framework for examination of issues related to law and management.

This study enables the identification of risk factors that multinational employers can use to strategically target their loss prevention efforts in order to more effectively and efficiently avoid or reduce potential liability for employment discrimination.

The risk factors identified in this study can help employers to take efforts to reduce employment discrimination in their multinational operations, thereby reducing the frequency and likelihood that such discrimination may occur.

This is the first study to use a risk management framework to empirically identify employment law risk exposures for multinational employers.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

This substantial article begins with an examination of two important grounds of discrimination: sex discrimination governed by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (and the related Equal Pay Act 1970) and racial discrimination under the Race Relations Act 1976. Discussion is confined to the right not to be discriminated against and covers the detailed provisions of these acts in this respect, judicial precedents and important cases heard not only in the British courts but in the European Court of Justice. The third section of the article is about discrimination in connection with trade union membership and activities governed by the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978.

The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the related Equal Pay Act 1970, and the Race Relations Act 1976 have not been consolidated by the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978. Each of the Acts treats sex and race discrimination in a general and broad sense. Both make similar provisions in connection with various aspects of discrimination in employment. Since one act is inspired by the other, the judicial precedent in sex discrimination cases will normally be followed in racial discrimination cases and vice versa. Both Acts are outlined and the grounds that constitute discrimination discussed as well as permissible discrimination. Enforcement of the Acts and liability is detailed. Discrimination in connection with trade union membership and activities is also examined. The right not to have action short of dismissal taken against the employee and remedies for action short of dismissal are discussed.

The issue of discrimination in Afghanistan is pervasive, and the present report focuses on gender discrimination in employment deemed particularly important for immediate policy intervention by the international community. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the measures taken to eliminate gender discrimination in employment since the American‐led invasion in 2001.

The paper is a literature review with potential to inform policy change to improve the employment situation of rural Afghan women. Although there is paucity of data on many facets of Afghan society, this paper synthesises available information regarding measures to improve employment for Afghan women and discusses factors that should be considered in future employment policies.

This paper establishes that many rural Afghan women today experience cultural and religious barriers to employment. The paper argues that much as there have been significant improvements in the employment situation of Afghan women living in cities since the US‐led invasion, rural Afghan women still suffer from inequality in employment. In addition, the paper finds that the barriers to employment opportunities confronting rural Afghan women today stem from existing cultural and religious practices.

The current Afghan Government and international community should pursue policies that would terminate the cultural and religious practices that violate Afghan women's employment rights.

The most valuable part of this paper is the new insight into gender discrimination in employment in the run up to the ten‐year anniversary of the ousting of the repressive Taliban regime. The paper's findings would serve as input for the current government's efforts to address gender discrimination in Afghanistan.