General Authority and Function of EEOC
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) of the United States of America is the body that is responsible for federal laws enforcement, especially by making it illegal and punishable when discriminating and employees, worker, and against any job applicant because of their sex, race, religion, ethnicity, genetic information, disability, national origin, and color (Petry, 2018). Sex involves sexual orientation, pregnancy, and transgender status. The EEOC laws apply to all work situations involving wages, harassment, benefits, hiring, promotions, training, and firing. The three main laws enforced by EEOC include EPA to ensure all employees receive equal pay, ADA for all Americans with disabilities, and ADEA to end employment discrimination.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has the power and authority to file a lawsuit protecting public interests and individual rights by litigating a few common cases. The EEOC considers certain factors before they decide to file a lawsuit. Such factors include case issues, the strength and magnitude of the evidence, and the vast impact the lawsuit could have on EEOC’s efforts toward combating workplace discrimination. In addition, the EEOC provides guidance and leadership to agencies present in the federal and at all stages of the equal employment opportunity programs in the federal government. Further, EEOC works with federal agencies in the state to ensure all the questions are answered, to conduct training on rules and laws to protect the employees from discrimination, and to develop materials to be used in education.
EEOC prevents discrimination before its occurrence by giving presentations to employers and employees, and it contains laws to be enforced. They also write and provide documents concerning the rules and laws required by EEOC to assist employers, applicants, and employees in understanding their workplace responsibilities and rights. The commission is not sued if he promises workplace changes, and in many cases, the employer is sued to fix the problem in court.
Chosen EEOC Case Brief Overview
Two Young Men at Grocery Store in New Jersey Reports Sexual Harassment
The chosen case involves two young men employed in 2020 as Assistant managers in a grocery store in New Jersey. Both young men filed job discrimination complaints to the commission after stopping their work at the grocery store.
The first man stated that he received unexpected sexual comments from a female assistant manager at the store. A few months later, the female worker was promoted to the store manager. The harassment proceeded, and the female manager talked to him about her affairs and sexual desires with other men workers (Krause & Park, 2023). The man continued to report that the female manager suggestively rubbed her body against him in the store, forcing the young man to quit the job due to her store manager’s behavior.
Another man claimed that he experienced similar harassment from the store manager. He said that the manager told other employers that the man was his boyfriend as she flashed her bra at him and called him “baby.” On discovering that the first man quit his job because of the situation, he began complaining and arguing with the manager, who suspended him immediately. On the following day, the young employee complained to the district manager, making him be fired for unprofessional conduct.
After thorough investigations of both complaints, a lawsuit was filed by EEOC against the grocery store. The claims were that the two young men were sexually harassed, violating Title VII of CRA, which prohibits gender harassment and employment discrimination.
Issues Related To the Reported Case Following EEOC Non-Compliance
The most common complaints brought to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission include disability, sex, age, retaliation, and racism cases.
These issues of non-compliance, like striving in an offensive and unfavorable environment, have become a persistent condition in various workplaces and employment. In other words, the conduct is pervasive and severe enough to create a working environment that a reasonable individual would consider abusive, intimidating, and hostile to endure. Non-employees, victims’ supervisors, employer’s agents, a co-worker, and supervisors in another area can be these harassers.
Prevention of workplace harassment is the tool to be employed by the company. Employers are therefore encouraged to correct any lawful harassment in the company and take necessary steps to prevent them from recurring. They should communicate clearly to all company employees that there will be no tolerance for harassing conduct, and if any, it is punishable. Employers should create a favorable working environment so that the employees are confident and free to raise any and be addressed immediately.
Employees are always encouraged to directly inform their harassers that their conduct is unwelcome and that they must stop them or be reported to the higher office. The harassment should be reported to the management earlier to prevent it from escalating to a greater scale.
The Possible Procedures That EEOC Uses When Investigating and Handling the Cases
The six steps EEOC primarily utilizes to investigate and handle cases include the initial complaint, explanation of the process, beginning the investigation, gathering evidence and facts, conducting interviews, and the final step is making a final decision. The reason for the investigation is that the complaints and discrimination would lead to tension in the workplace, damaging the company’s reputation and employees’ relations with the employer. It is essential to fully investigate discrimination and allegations to lower the risk of court battles and costly fines from the government and make employees enjoy working in the company. These discriminations may polarize the workplace, especially since too many relevant personal details leak to the accuser (Baumle et al., 2020).
To intervene in the cases, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit claiming that punishing the second young man was illegal after complaining of harassment (Zawada, 2018). The filed cases are still in court, and if a settlement does not solve it, the jury will be presented with this case by EEOC to determine if the grocery store company should be held responsible for the behavior of the female manager.
Analysis of the Potential Punishments or Sanctions That EEOC May Impose the Non-Compliant Employers
The punishments and sanctions imposed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) organ for non-compliance of the employers are punitive damages and compensatory that may only be awarded in cases involving intentional discrimination and harassment. The company and the employer are required to end any practice of discrimination and encouraged to take possible steps to future harassment are prevented. In addition, sanctions issuance, for example, sanctions in the form of sanctions against those involved in harassment or discrimination. For instance in the selected case, if the grocery store manager really harassed the two young men, then the EEOC will order remedial action including back pay and other compensations.
When the harassment or allegation of discrimination is false or lacks merit, the employer should not take negative action against the complainant for filing the case. This is according to anti-retaliation provisions (ARP) of title seven of CRA, 1964.
References
Baumle, A. K., Badgett, M. L., & Boutcher, S. (2020). New research on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination: Effect of state policy on charges filed at the EEOC. Journal of Homosexuality, 67(8), 1135-1144.
Krause, G. A., & Park, J. (2023). How status‐group power differentials shape age discrimination within US federal agencies: Evidence from EEOC formal complaint filings, 2010–2019. Public Administration Review, 83(1), 51-64.
Petry, E. E. (2018). Master of its case: EEOC investigations after issuing a right-to-sue notice. The University of Chicago Law Review, 85(5), 1227–1268.
Zawada, B. (2018). Me Too: The EEOC, workplace sexual harassment, and the modern workplace. Wis. JL Gender, & Soc’y, pp. 33, 199.
write