Sexual Favoritism falls under the Hostile Environment category of the federal law that governs harassment and discrimination in the workplace.

Sexual Favoritism is not a federal law unto itself (although some states declare it as such), but an aspect of either Quid Pro Quo or Hostile Environment that is worth exploring.

This type of harassment occurs when employees, who submit to a manager or supervisor’s sexual demands, are rewarded by that manager or supervisor. It is important to note however, that the wronged party(ies) is not the one who submitted, but those who did not and are denied the benefits of the submission.

In other words, employees who are otherwise denied raises or promotions may claim that they were penalized by the sexual attention directed at the favored coworkers.

How has the court ruled in these cases?

• Isolated events and non-coerced submission to sexual demands have not been upheld by the courts as sexual harassment.
• The employer may be held liable for unlawful sex discrimination against other persons who were qualified for but were denied that employment opportunity or benefit.
• Supervisors may also be held liable.

Court Case

Astra AB, a Swedish company, admitted it allowed a hostile work environment — including requests for sexual favors in exchange for favorable treatment – for women at its U.S. headquarters in Westboro, Massachusetts.

Award: $9,850,000 in monetary damages

For more on other types of Sexual Harassment, read about Quid Pro Quo or Sexual Harassment by Non-Employees.

Protect your business from this type of harassment. Make sure your employees are well-trained in harassment and discrimination prevention and awareness.

Rhonda Goetz
Chrome Zebra, Inc.
Helping Employers Prevent Harassment and Discrimination Lawsuits
866.241.9927
http://www.chromezebra.com
Online Human Resource Training

Rhonda Goetz is the owner and CEO of Chrome Zebra. She also is an authorized harassment and discrimination trainer and online instructional designer.

Her online courses provide businesses with an alternate training method that saves time and money. Employees train at their desks or workstations, and can train anytime. Businesses no longer have to lose production time to large training seminars, or hire expensive consultants or be locked into a set training schedule. Online training is cost-effective as well; per employee cost is approximately $25 or less for each employee.

Get the F.ree 10 Tips to Prevent Sexual Harassment, sign up here.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Rhonda_Goetz
http://EzineArticles.com/?Company-Liability:-Sexual-Harassment-and-Inappropriate-Rewards&id=79479

Age Discrimination

Over time, individuals often gain valuable work experience that can be useful in obtaining new employment later on. When hiring, many businesses look for employees who have prior experience in the field and are familiar with the requirements of that particular position. Unfortunately, applicants may face employment discrimination based solely on their age and not their qualifications.

If an employer practices age discrimination against applicants or employees, the victims may be eligible to pursue legal compensation. Employment laws prohibit employers from making decisions regarding hiring, promotion, and compensation based on age alone, and businesses that engage in such practices may face penalties for their actions.

Employers may attempt to justify age-based decisions by claiming that they wish to groom younger employees for long-term employment at the company. They may also claim that they are protecting the older applicant from being uncomfortable in an office that has a younger workforce. Neither excuse is reason to refuse a qualified applicant.

Businesses are required to give proper consideration to all applicants who are appropriately qualified for the open position. If an applicant does not have the required qualifications or will not reasonably be able to perform the duties of the position, he or she usually cannot claim age discrimination took place. Individuals claiming discrimination usually need to show that the employer made the decision based on age and not qualifications in the hiring process.

Employees can also experience age discrimination within the workplace. If an employer refuses to promote or give pay raises based on the age of the employee, the practice may be considered age discrimination. Again, the law requires that decisions about promotions and compensation should be considered in the fairest possible manner and should be based on eligibility and performance.

Employers can protect themselves against discrimination lawsuits by making sure that all decisions are made based on qualifications and performance. Promotions and raises should be given to employees who display good work ethic and show dedication to the company, and deserving individuals should not be passed over. If decisions within the workplace are made in a fair and justifiable manner, employees will have no claim to employment discrimination.

If you have been the victim of age discrimination when applying for a job or in your place of business, you may be eligible for compensation. For more information about age discrimination and the law, visit the website of the San Antonio employment lawyers of Melton & Kumler, LLP

Joseph Devine

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Joseph_Devine
http://EzineArticles.com/?Age-Discrimination-in-the-Workplace&id=2651617

Discrimination and harassment in the workplace has been a frequent topic of discussion in the media. But did you know that shy people are often a frequent target of discrimination and harassment?

Shy people’s quietness, seemingly timid disposition and lack of assertiveness can make them easy targets of harassment by bored or disgruntled coworkers. Sometimes shy people have trouble making eye contact, which can be seen as a sign of weakness.

Furthermore, shy people often have more difficulty making friends and building relationships when starting a new job. Networking is more difficult for them, and fewer people will come to their defense or aid if they are unfairly criticized.

Indeed, unreasonable or unjust criticism is a frequent weapon of on-the-job harassment. There are laws against racial or sexual discrimination, but there are no laws against “shy” discrimination.

Criticism is almost universally seen as an important tool to help us improve our work performance. In many cases, it can be. But criticism can also be used as a weapon to paint someone they don’t like as an incompetent. On-the-job gossip, backbiting or ridicule can be quite brutal and can damage one’s reputation as an effective worker. As author Sidney B. Simon once wrote, “the knives of negative criticism which people stick in us are just as sharp and deadly as those made of steel and borne by assassins.”

Simon went on further to state that “our society has somehow conditioned us to accept the notion that criticism of all sorts is bound to be good for us… that the more it hurts the better it is for us.”

But the term “constructive criticism” implies an important corollary: that criticism can also be negative, unreasonable, hurtful and destructive. It can be a weapon in office politics or simply a form of gossip and backbiting towards another in order to create a false sense of self-importance or to relieve boredom.

How to you deal with such forms of harassment? It is certainly a good idea, when starting off in the new workplace, to build as many relationships and friendships with coworkers as possible immediately, something that is admittedly harder to do for shy people. It is also a good idea to learn names and job positions of all coworkers on the first day.

Many people try to grab a false sense of prestige or importance, and they can do an amazingly effective job of putting on airs and making new workers think that they have some kind of supervisory power when in reality they have none. So it is a good idea to get all these things straight as soon as possible. Remembering everyone’s name and position will also help you to make a good impression on your coworkers.

The author of this article describes many more ways to deal with difficult people effectively in his new course, “Break out of your Shell! How To Overcome Shyness So You Can Get On With Your Life!” In it, he discusses how to deal with many types of difficult people such as constant interrupters, people who go on and on and on and on, snobs, bossy coworkers, constant critics and argumentative know-it-alls.

Learn more about this breakthrough system at Shy Facts and get a FREE ebook, “How to Remember People’s Names; the Master Key to Success and Popularity.”

This article may be republished in any newsletter, ezine or website, provided this message is included.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Timothy_Arends

Lenders who make mortgage loans on a discriminatory basis may incur liability under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which punishes discrimination in credit. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) prohibits a variety of discriminatory lending on the basis of several factors. These include race, color, religion, national origin, sex, and marital status. Violations of the ECOA may also be violations of the Fair Housing Act.

Redlining and reverse redlining are practices that are prohibited by the ECOA. These involve offering different credit terms (or restricting lending options) to certain areas based on racial characteristics. Red lining is when a mortgage company marks off certain neighborhoods or communities for restricted lending or higher cost loans on the basis of color or other discriminatory standards. In effect, the bank draws a “red line” around such communities and potential loan applicants from these areas are denied credit.

Reverse redlining works in the opposite manner. A mortgage company or bank would establish lending standards that encouraged many more types of loans to flow into a certain area or demographic. This may be part of a classic pump and dump scam, where lenders work to inflate the value of properties and provide funds to borrowers who can not pay them back. The lender then forecloses and is able to take the properties. Both redlining and reverse redlining are financially injurious to both borrowers and lenders, which is why the practice is somewhat rare.

Borrowers may have a very difficult time proving they have been the subject of discrimination in a foreclosure case. If they suspect this, however, it may be worth their while to speak with an attorney who specializes in such cases. This is because liability under the ECOA may result in lenders being responsible for actual damages suffered by borrowers, punitive damages up to $10,000, and attorney fees. Some attorneys may take a case on contingency if a special instance of discrimination can be shown. It may be best at least to consult with an attorney before raising this defense in an answer to a foreclosure complaint.

The statute of limitations for violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act is two years. If borrowers obtained their mortgage more than two years ago, this law may not apply to their mortgage. Again, the best option in the case of suspected discriminatory lending would be for homeowners to consult with an attorney who specializes in this area of lending law.

The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) requires financial institutions to publicly release information related to ECOA lending. These reports are provided to the public online and show information on the percentage of loans given to minorities by different lenders in various areas throughout the country. The general public is able to search zip codes, how many applications each bank took in the area, the demographics of various groups, and the interest rate offered to each group. This can be a starting point for homeowners researching potential discriminatory or predatory lending practices.

Although violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act may be somewhat uncommon in the mortgage lending industry, homeowners may want to become more familiar with the law. However, the housing market boom of the past decade had been more a result of all markets being artificially pumped up and anyone who could sign their name was given a loan. This makes actual discrimination more unlikely, as the Federal Reserve set up the markets for bad investment and banks simply took advantage of any borrower coming through the door.

Nick writes for the ForeclosureFish website, which gives homeowners the information and resources they need to [http://www.foreclosurefish.net/avoidforeclosure/]avoid foreclosure on their own and defend themselves against the bank’s lawsuit. The site describes various solutions to save a house, including foreclosure refinancing, deed in lieu, loan modification, stopping a foreclosure sale, bankruptcy, and more. Visit the site on the web to read more about how you can avoid foreclosure and eviction, repair your credit, and establish a long term financial plan once a hardship is over: http://www.foreclosurefish.net/

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Nick_Adama

The United States has legislation in place that forbids discrimination based on a person’s sex. However, under certain special circumstances, this discrimination can be exercised. But we are more concerned about sex discrimination in employment as it has a tendency to rear its ugly head when it comes to recruitment, training, promotion or paying an employee.

Sex discrimination in employment can be either in the form of harassment or victimization. That is why employers have to have workplace policies in place so that all employees are treated equally irrespective of their gender or marital status. And, any neglect on the part of the employer can be viewed as sex discrimination.

So, what does sex discrimination in employment mean? Basically it refers to treating an employee differently based on the person’s sex or gender. This treatment is usually negative and not seen as favorable. This means that if an employee is not paid equally for similar work just because of his or her gender, it can be viewed as sex discrimination. In other words, two employees of different gender doing similar work have to be paid the same salary or wages.

You can also discriminate based on sex if you refuse to offer a job to a person just because a job is traditionally seen as a man’s job or a woman’s job. This type of discrimination is referred to as direct sex discrimination.

Then there is indirect sex discrimination where an employer ends up putting a requirement in a job that is seen as unreasonable or unjustified. For example, an employer sends a memo stating that women employees are required to wear perfume.

Although we might brush it under the carpet, but sex discrimination in employment is a reality and that is why there are laws in place to handle situations that might crop up in an organization or a workplace.

About Author:

Pauline Go is an online leading expert in legal industry. She also offers top quality articles like: legal advice help, Pay Discrimination Disparate Impact

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Pauline_Go

It’s my property, so I can rent to whomever I like.” This attitude is understandable, but landlords must realize that today there are legal limits on the landlord’s decisions. A landlord’s tastes may be reasonable, strict, or quirky, but they cannot be based on race, religion, or other categories that tenant law protects.

Can I pick and choose tenants as I like? What is “retaliatory eviction” all about?  Can I pick and choose tenants as I like?

Yes – within limits set by landlord law.

Federal, state, and local landlord laws make it illegal for landlords to “discriminate.” But people sometimes say “That’s discrimination!” without understanding what is prohibited.

Federal laws prevent landlords from discriminating on the grounds of race, religion, sex, ethnic background, and disability. Some state and local laws go further, prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of marital status, sexual orientation, presence of children, and age.

But so long as you are not discriminating on one of the listed grounds, you may rent to whomever you like. If you don’t want smokers in your building, or if you see a prospective tenant as a poor credit risk (even if you’re wrong), or if for some other, non prohibited reason you just don’t like the person, there is no law to stop you from rejecting a tenant for that reason.

If you are threatened with a discrimination claim, see a lawyer right away. You might be facing a lawsuit for huge money damages.

What is “retaliatory eviction” all about?

Sometimes it seems that a landlord has a “right” to evict. He has given a proper notice to terminate a month-to-month tenancy, or a fixed term lease has expired. If the tenant doesn’t leave, he will sue to evict, and the tenant’s position seems hopeless. But even where it seems that the landlord’s right to evict is absolute, the courts may refuse to help him if the reason underlying his desire to evict is to “retaliate” against the tenant for her exercise of some legal right.

Suppose the tenant has a month-to-month tenancy and the landlord refuses to fix a leaking roof. The tenant complains to the city’s housing inspection department, and the landlord learns of the complaint. Not wanting such a troublemaker around anymore, he serves her with a notice terminating her tenancy. If she fails to leave and he sues to evict, the tenant may raise the defense of “retaliatory eviction.” If she proves the landlord’s reason (which might not be easy), the court will refuse to evict her. Evicting her in this situation would discourage other tenants from reporting code violations. Because code enforcement agencies depend (in part) on tenant complaints, and one of the basic purposes of the code enforcement program would be undermined. The court will refuse to help the landlord undermine the efforts of another government agency. [http://www.gottrouble.com/]Click to read more articles from GotTrouble.

Henry Dahut is an attorney and marketing strategist who works with some of the largest law firms in the world. He is the author of the best selling practice development book, “Marketing The Legal Mind” and offers consulting services in the area of strategic branding and law firm marketing. Henry is also the founder of the legal online help-portal http://www.GotTrouble.com – the award winning site that helps people through serious legal and financial trouble.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Henry_Dahut

Discrimination in America is as prevalent today as it was in the early 1900′s. Some people may argue against the previous statement; saying that America has made huge improvements in civil rights and equality in the last one hundred years. In some ways those people would be right, but in many other ways they would be wrong. First off, when you think that the underlying causes of discrimination are based off immediate impressions such as: age, clothing, attractiveness, verbiage, heritage, cleanliness, etc. you begin to realize that this assumptive nature lies within all people and is used to judge all other people. In other words, discrimination can and is used against every nationality, age, sex, religion and every category in between. When these assumptions or stereotypes become hugely exaggerated or start to negatively impact the people they are being used against, that is when harmless judgment changes to the much more severe issue of discrimination. Because of the extreme historical disadvantages faced by African-Americans in our countries past, the little progress that we have had in addressing discrimination can be largely contributed to the leaders of the civil rights movement. True, a major improvement in the last century did occur when the American people became conscious of the need for equality and demanded government intervention. The government responded by passing the civil rights act of 1964 which, among other things, allowed prosecution for the following actions:

•    harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or age;

•    retaliation against an individual for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in an investigation, or opposing discriminatory practices;

•    employment decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about the abilities, traits, or performance of individuals of a certain sex, race, age, religion, or ethnic group, or individuals with disabilities.

- Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88-352) (Title VII)

The above laws were created to ensure that people are given equal opportunities in the workplace and would be protected from retaliation when confronting individuals whom discriminate. Then why do I argue that discrimination is still apparent in America? Mainly because I personally have been impacted by the negative affects of discrimination at my workplace and was subject to a bias resolution. No, I am not African-American, female, homosexual or disabled and yet I still experienced discrimination with just as severely of consequences as an individual from any of those sub cultures which are often in the news for being the victims of discrimination. In fact, it seems that because I do not fit into any of those sub-cultures, I am not taken seriously with my complaints or concerns. Are some forms of discrimination more acceptable than other forms? I think not; discrimination is discrimination, no matter what context it is in or how small or large the person is affected by it. Don’t get me wrong; I am, by no means, attempting to say that I am a “victim” of the newly coined idea of “reverse racism”. Reverse racism is the idea that affirmative action has led to the over-protection of minority groups and has resulted in the majority group being disadvantaged as a result. In fact, reverse racism and the need for the civil rights act of 1964 are result of the underlying issue at hand.

The underlying issue that spawns discrimination and inequality is; anyone and everyone can fit into a stereotype held by another individual and will therefore be subject to some form of discrimination or prejudice in their lifetime. Because everyone can be discriminated against, does that mean that everyone also partakes in discrimination? To some extent, yes, I believe that everyone uses snap judgment and stereotypes to quickly asses a stranger’s personality. The ability to judge based off appearance is a natural ability that is vital in our species survival; but the intensity of this judgment separates innocent appraisal from an illegal injustice. When you think about it, almost any aspect of your personality, appearance, ideals, beliefs, wants, needs or desires can be looked at in a negative light and is therefore subject to appraisal; which in turn creates a positive or negative appearance which in turn can be a means for discrimination.

So, what can be done to help counteract discrimination? First, we need to understand that there are multiple forms of discrimination. There is an unconscious application of discrimination where an individuals’ (lets say a manager for example) personal beliefs and ideals contributes to an overall negative view of a certain person(lets say an employee). This subtle discrimination will inadvertently lead to a lessoned willingness for the manager to present opportunities to that employee, either consciously or unconsciously. This form of discrimination often goes unnoticed, making it much more difficult to asses. To help resolve this problem, I think that the media could attempt to bring the issue into the public’s conscious. If people are made more aware of this taking place; either the individuals who are unconsciously discriminating against people will become aware of it and attempt to change their actions or people around them (say coworkers) will report the discrimination to authorities. Another form of discrimination is the conscious / apparent form of discrimination. In this form of discrimination, an individual purposefully tries to belittle another person, sometimes maliciously. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was made for people like this. As we saw above, passing laws is somewhat effective but, up to this point, has only been able to protect members in minority groups. However, for people with malicious intentions, I think that the best form of rehabilitation would be through government interaction.

Due to the personal nature of discrimination; the solution to this problem must be found on the personal level as well. If I raised hell every time I saw people treated unfairly, I guarantee I could have helped so many people. If someone had done it for me when I was treated unfairly I would have been more inclined to do it for someone else. To solve this problem, it must begin from the bottom up. So what can you do to help? First, you should make sure that you are not guilty of unconsciously discriminating against anyone for any reason. Then, you could let people know if they too are treating people unfairly without knowing. Lastly and most importantly, do not tolerate being discriminated against. Lead by example. Revolution!

Robert Coffen

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Robert_Coffen

Sexual orientation describes a person’s enduring romantic, emotional, affectionate, and sexual attraction towards others. It is distinguishable from one’s biological sex, gender identity, and social gender role.  Sexual orientation exists on a continuum from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality, with varying degrees of bisexuality in between. Typically, orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior experience. Feelings and emotional leanings may occur first, without a person actually acting on their emotions for a long time, if ever.

Contrary to popular belief, homosexuality is not changeable by therapy. Conversion techniques are not successful and actually hurt the person in treatment, by engraining social biases and prejudices. Unfortunately, even if a homosexual or bisexual person does not undergo damaging treatment to convert them to heterosexuality, many still experience the negative effects of intolerance and discrimination based on their sexual preferences.

In the United States, there are currently no laws to protect employees against discriminatory practices based on sexual orientation in the private sector. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 guards workers against harmful workplace actions based on race, sex, religion, color, and national origin. Additional amendments and acts since the 1960′s have expanded protection to age, disability status, and sex-based wage discrimination. At this point in history, however, only federal government employees are sheltered from workplace orientation discrimination.

On the positive side, several states currently have laws in place designed to safeguard the rights of homosexual and bisexual employees in the workplace. Discrimination based on amorous preference is illegal in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. Additionally, one court case, Tanner v. Oregon Health Sciences University, has found that sexual orientation discrimination is prohibited under the state constitution. Other states, including Delaware, Indiana, Michigan, Montana, and Pennsylvania, also have legal rules preventing workplace inequity in the public sector. Finally, the Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (SONDA) prohibits discrimination based on actual or perceived orientation in New York.   SONDA came into effect in 2003 and provides a legal avenue for parties experiencing discriminatory practices to pursue action against the unfair workplace procedures.

If you are interested in learning more about inequity in the workplace, this employee discrimination site can provide more helpful information. Through the education of both employees and supervisors, illegal and immoral employment environments, where people are unfairly judged for personal characteristics, can be eliminated.

Joseph Devine

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Joseph_Devine