Discrimination at workplace
Every person is entitled to work in an environment that is free from discrimination, harassment and bullying (Lewis et al., 2020). Bullying could be based on religion, age, race, gender, fairness and dignity. Harassment most often damages the wellbeing for a person, job security and creates a hostile workplace culture which makes the business destructive. The common forms of harassment in workplace include; job refusal, isolation by co-workers, denial of transfers, promotions and training opportunities, not getting paid the same amount as other employees doing other jobs among others (Lewis et al., 2020). A lot of workers complain of being denied transfers, promotions and training opportunities which becomes case study today.
Case study scenario
I have worked in Sunlight Company for seven years. In the line of rendering my services to the company, we had a fatal accident, and I lost my sight. Occasionally, workers receive circulars about training opportunities that lead to promotions in my company. I sent my application form and got informed after that that the selection process involves face- to face interview as well as a supervised written test. I contacted the manager for human resource in charge of the recruitment process. I explained to him that it could be challenging for me to take a written exercise, as I was visually impaired, lacking essential writing tools such as braille and was registered blind four years ago after an accident we had. The Human resource manager suggested that I must withdraw my application form as will not meet full requirements for the recruitment process.
Case study analysis
From the above- stated case scenario, the employee has been denied legal right due to his or her disability (Snyder et al., 2010). He or she can not get a promotion or attend any training session within the company due to his or her impairment. Ironically, the company that should be responsible for the employee’s loss of sight becomes a major stumbling block. Although the applicant succumbed to blindness while rendering services to the very same company, he or she faces brutal form discrimination. The employee is denied a legal opportunity to develop his or her career. Employee’s disability turns out to be a significant contributing factor towards the denial to attend training opportunities which lead to a promotion.
According to the United States Disability Discrimination Act 1995, it is unlawful for employers to get discriminated due to their disability during the recruitment process. The person with any form of disability or requiring special attention should be granted the first opportunity for training, promotion or any other form of benefit. If the employee with a disability is discriminated from securing training or promotion chances based on his or her disability, the law should be employed (O’Brien, 2016). The act is used to ensure employee rights have been violated are fought. The unreasonable company tactics of eliminating applicants, in this case, are based on low reference, by referring the employee as being disabled, which is punishable by United States Law.
As a matter of facts, employers have a lawful duty to make more reasonable steps when dealing with persons with disabilities and exceptional cases. They should ensure workers with disability get placed at a substantial advantage in the aspects of hiring them when compared with people who have recorded no form of disability. The legal duty that the employer is entitled is termed as the employer’s legal responsibility to make ‘reasonable adjustments (Okechukwu et al., 2014). What is termed as ‘reasonable’ in this case depends on several factors. Amongst them, an Industrial Tribunal will look at the size of the cost of making any adjustment for persons with disability within an organization. The legal authority requires well-developed companies and managers to be more sensitive and reasonable when dealing with people with disability.
For instance in the case under study, when the applicant raised a concern to the Human Resources Manager, making him aware that he/she was a person with visual impairment, the manager ought to have considered discussing further with the applicant. He was to agree with the applicant about the type of necessary adjustments that he/she may require to fully participate in the recruitment exercise(O’Brien, 2016). More so, an effective alternative method of completing the exercise test was supposed to have been explored or considered. A solution which may include giving a waiving test for this particular individual requiring special attention could have been developed. Therefore, forcing the disabled person to withdraw from the recruitment process, amounts to unlawful disability discrimination.
The applicant may decide to file a claim against the company for violating his or her rights. The investigation for these claim can be conducted by first’ questioning the company if the applicant is one of their employees and whether he or she became visually impaired as he was providing services to the company. Second, the investigator should inquire whether the employee made an application for the training opportunity and submitted the form to the Human resource manager. Third, the person doing investigation should know the criteria that were employed in recruiting successful members, especially those with any form of disability. Finally, the investigator should see the manager’s report to the disabled applicant and what form of consideration did he put in place to fairly evaluate the applicant with a disability, who was open enough to share about his record of disability.
In conclusion, every employee, irrespective of having a disability, should not be discriminated at the workplace. He or she should be given a chance to attend training opportunities and get a promotion, just like any other worker. Discrimination of any form against a person with disability amounts to legal punishment.