Examples Of Indirect Discrimination Because Of Direct Discrimination

Disparate treatment is the unlawful treatment of individuals that violates Title VII rights. The Different treatment of a plaintiff relies on direct, comparative, and circumstantial evidence to meet their burden of persuasion (Roberts, 2010). When individuals complain, they have been treated differently due to their protected class. They are claiming the organization has discriminated against them. For instance, this employee may state the firm only hires males at this facility. Upon investigation, the employer learns that the ratio of workers who are men is greater than women. At this point, the company may explain why the reason for hiring males is higher since women cannot perform these tasks as it may affect their well-being. Nevertheless,

Disparate treatment is intentional discrimination. It exists when individuals are treated differently in a similar situation. It is based on considerations of age, race, color, disability status, religion, gender, or national origin.

Equality Act 2010 - The Equalities Act 2010 supersedes all other discrimination law including Race Relations and Disability Discrimination Act. The Equality Act 2010 provides a single, consolidated source of discrimination law. Although this new law has substituted the other acts the principle are the same meaning that schools cannot unlawfully discriminate against pupils because of their sex, race, disability, religion or belief or sexual

• Indirect discrimination: when you have a rule or policy that applies to everyone but disadvantages a person with a protected characteristic.

Hi Cecille, In answering your first question, the group I think out of the four examples we encounter daily in our lives would be "prejudiced discriminator." For example, "Isis" is a group who does not resent in stereotyping others. They do not hesitate sharing their prejudical beliefs with others and turning it into discriminatory behavior whenever they have the opportunity. In response to your second question, Yes, I believe the media is the main culprit to the way we preceive others. The reason for this, the media does not completely tell the truth and the information is filtered when sharing with the American people. For this reason, I believe the media is responsible for influencing people to be even more judgemental to being prejudical

In today’s society systematic oppression has really been a factor regarding on the issues of minority groups. In our opinion, we feel like if Bill Cosby wasn’t a colored man suppose he was a white man this case would have been a lot more lenient because people of color have them labeled as bad people. People who kill, rape, sell drugs etc. and white people that sometimes are the worst, always they treat white people with like more finesse of have more them respect. At this time the colored people not only suffer from racism, but also immigrants from different countries are suffering a lot of racism. Another example of systematic oppression is about Bill Cosby accused of raping women was harshly accused and especially for being black.

Discrimination is when someone has a bias opinion on a specific crowd of people due to their race, sex, religion, or order of rank. This basically goes hand in hand with the phrase judging a book by its cover meaning the person with the negative opinion will not give the other individual a fair chance for the reason being they are being stereotypical and not thinking of the other person’s talent, or character. A modern day example of discrimination would be if a male employer were to compensate a female employee a lower pay due to her gender. At some time in everyone’s life due to today society, we have all been victimized by discrimination. Whether it may be a dirty look from a random person, or the way you dress, talk, and even look.

Discrimination is about treating a person/people differently because of their age, religion, gender and race. The Equality Act 2010 protects all

What does white supremacy, Black face, and reverse-racism have in common? That’s right, they are all wrong; done by certain privileged, white individuals to justify their racist views in a Eurocentric and segregated world. Reverse-racism, as defined by urban dictionary, states that it is, “the act of being racist, in reverse.” This definition of reverse-racism, in my opinion is very problematic and erroneous on numerous levels, and I will tell you why.

Discrimination: Discrimination in itself is purposeful exclusion of an individual or group based on specific characteristics. It could be direct, indirect or combined. People that are already vulnerable in most cases find it have to bounce back from it.

Racial oppression is burdening a specific race with unjust or cruel restraints or impositions. Racial oppression could be in the news, laws, or police work from time to time. In a article I was reading on IGNITE Oppression has been defined as institutionalized power that historically formed and perpetuated over time. I go through racial oppression every day, in school, the public, and in sports. I’ve been judge based off my color and my gender. I so happen to be the fastest track runner at Dobson high school, but that has nothing to do with my race, or the color of my skin. I train hard and continue to push a little further every day. I don’t believe I should be pushed down for just being who I am.

Indirect discrimination can arise when it is a condition, rule, policy, or even a practice in your company that applies to everyone but particularly disadvantages people who share a protected characteristic.

The process of establishing if an action/policy is discriminatory can be very challenging. However, a number of theories seek to differentiate actions that constitute discrimination and those that do not. Disparate treatment Theory is amongst the most commonly used theories that have been used to ascertain whether an act or policy amounts to discrimination or not. The theory argues that one is subject to discrimination if they are treated less favorably than others are in similar situations (Bent, 2011).

Hiring practices are regulated by Equal Opportunity Employment laws, however discrimination still takes place. The question is when do you know for sure if discrimination has occurred? Does having a medical condition create discrimination in hiring practices? While it is illegal to not hire someone due to pregnancy for example, many professionals will view the process as the time it will take to train an individual to do a job, they will then be leaving for maternity leave and may be unlikely to return. Many times a workplace gets additional benefits for hiring someone with a disability. Many interviewers do not go into sensitive details, and unless a disability or pregnancy is clearly evident they may not be aware until after the position is already offered. If the person is extremely qualified an employer may be willing to overlook a medical condition in favor of achieving results. Deontological theory states that moral actions are a result of the actions rules or beliefs. The duty of an employer is to provide a working environment free and clear of discrimination, to remain ethical and moral in the hiring process, and to follow the law. However, what happens when those rules are not followed?

Indirect discrimination will occur where a person imposes a requirement, condition or practice that has the effect of disadvantaging people with a protected attribute, and that is not reasonable.