blow open ended final

1.      Which, if any, of the following scenarios would support an employee’s claim of discrimination on the basis of national origin?

a)      Applicant with a speech impediment is unable to pronounce the letter “r”. The applicant therefore often has difficulty being understood when speaking and is denied a position.

b)      The owner of a manufacturing facility staffed completely by Mexicans refuses employment to a white American manager because the owner is concerned that the Mexicans will only consent to supervision by and receive direction from another Mexican.

c)       An Indian restaurant seeks to fill a server position. The advertisement requests applications from qualified individuals of Indian descent in order to add to the authenticity of the restaurant. In the past, the restaurant found that its business declined when it used Caucasian servers because the atmosphere of the restaurant suffered. An Italian applies for the position and is denied employment.

d)      A company advertises for Japanese-trained managers, because the employer has found that they are much more likely to remain at the company for an extended time, to be loyal and devoted to the firm, and to react well to direction and criticism. An American applies for the position and is denied employment in favor of an equally qualified Japanese-trained applicant, who happens to also be Japanese.

A teacher claimed that she was diagnosed with adult Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). She brought a claim against the school district alleging that the district had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and also a New York human rights law for discriminating against her on the basis of her ADHD, for retaliating against her for a complaint she filed with the New York State Division of Human Rights, and for failing to accommodate her ADHD. The teacher claimed that actions by the school district brought about emotional distress. Does the District have the right to compel the teacher to provide authorizations for the release of all records from her social networking accounts as part of its discovery during this case?

            Ashley Johnson worked at Brixx Pizza in Charlotte, North Carolina. During one of her lunch shifts, a couple stayed for three hours, forcing Ashley to remain past her scheduled hours. They left her a tip of only $5.00, much lower than would be expected for the total bill that they incurred. Ashley was quite upset and, when she got home, vented on Facebook by calling them cheap and also mentioning the restaurant by name. Two days later, Ashley was confronted by her employer about the post. Despite her having few Facebook friends and strong privacy settings, Brixx had learned about the rant. They fired her based on two components of company policy: (1) speaking disparagingly about customers and (2) casting the restaurant in a negative light on social networks. Was the employer within its legal right to terminate her employment? Is the termination a violation of Ashley’s privacy?

Cynthia requested a two-week leave from her employer to go on a religious pilgrimage. The pilgrimage was not a requirement of her religion, but Cynthia felt it was a “calling from God.” Will it violate Title VII if Cynthia’s employer does not grant her the leave? Explain. [Tiano v. Dillard Department Stores, Inc., 1998 WL 117864 (9th Cir. 1998).] Compare with a case in which the UPS Jehovah’s Witness employee’s supervisor denied his request for a schedule accommodation to allow him to attend the annual religious service, terminated the new employee a few days later, and placed him on a do-not-rehire list.

Mamdouh El-Hakem was employed by BJY, Inc., for more than a year. His manager repeatedly called Mamdouh, an Arabic employee, “Manny” or “Hank,” instead of his given name. His manager explained that he believed that Mamdouh would have a better opportunity for success with the firm’s clients with a more Western-sounding name. However, Mamdouh made it clear during his entire time with BJY that he objected to the westernization of his name and requested repeatedly that the manager call him by his rightful moniker. Mamdouh finally sued for national origin discrimination. Does he have a claim?

6.     A white, non-Latino meat cutter was fired by his supermarket employer and replaced with a Latino worker for reasons he believes were racially motivated. Can he sue the company for national origin discrimination? Is it possible to commit national origin discrimination by favoring a Latino person over a white, non-Latino person? If so, what would he need to prove to satisfy a prima facie case and then to succeed overall? [EEOC v. West Front Street Foods, LLC d/b/a Compare Foods, No. 5:08-cv-102 (W.D. N.C. 2008).]

A nursing home instituted an English-only policy for its employees. Latino employees were disciplined for violating the policy. Is the policy void on its face, or are some English-only policies acceptable under the law? Does the policy’s legality depend on the type of conversation involved (i.e., whether the employee is speaking to customers or speaking to co-employees on a break)? Does the policy’s legality depend on how it is enforced

A female restaurant employee is on the phone in the kitchen talking to her mother. The chef of the restaurant comes up to the employee, throws off his chef’s hat, grabs both the employees arms, and begins shaking her violently and screaming at her. She reports this to the police. She is later terminated and sues for gender discrimination. Will she win? Why or why not?

During an interview, an employer asks a female applicant questions such as whether she had children, what her child care responsibilities were, and how her family felt about her weekly commute between the business’s headquarters in Virginia and the family home in New York. The employer also asked the applicant “how her husband handled the fact that [she] was away from home so much, not caring for the family” and said he had “a very difficult time” understanding why any man would allow his wife to live away from home during the workweek. Is this employer’s line of questioning a violation of Title VII?

An employee says she was forced to quit her job because of her status as a mother of young children. She claimed that her female supervisor created a hostile work environment that violated Title VII. She was replaced by another mother. Does she win?