Business Ethics Reverse Discrimination Term Paper

Business Ethics Reverse Discrimination - Term Paper Example However, there is a phenomenon referred to as reverse discrimination, which is defined as occurring â€Å"when a person is denied an opportunity because of preferences given to protected-class individuals who may be less qualified† (Mathis & Jackson, 2005, p.103). In this situation, it must be proven that the organization where the individual is employed was denied opportunities or received discriminatory actions because a member of a protected class was given preferential treatment. This paper describes situations in the workplace that involve reverse discrimination, with a focus on the legal structure that forbids this from occurring and the ethical issues potentially involved in workplace reverse discrimination scenarios. The Letter of the Law The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibits discrimination related to compensation, working conditions, or certain privileges for individuals over the age of 40 that work for employers with 20 or more employees (Mathis & Jackson). It is a federal law, thus it applies to all businesses across the United States fitting the profile of 20 or more employees. A situation occurred where those individuals who were considered a protected class against the ADEA filed suit alleging reverse discrimination based on benefits provisions and early retirement benefits options. At General Dynamics Land Systems, the company decided it would be in the best interest of the business to alter the retiree health care benefits scheme. Full health care benefits were to be provided upon signing the new General Dynamics contract, but only if the individual was 50 years of age or older (Zink, 2006). Workers who were not yet of 50 years of age, thus not in a protected class under the ADEA, filed suit against General Dynamics citing reverse discrimination since they were not to be afforded the full health care benefits due to their younger age profiles. The ADEA explicitly states the following: â€Å"It shall be unlawful for an employer – (1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, term, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s age† (Zink, 2006, p.2). Ultimately, this case was dismissed by the Circuit Court, citing that reverse discrimination was not allowed under the ADEA. However, the younger workers were allowed to pursue their reverse discrimination suit citing other legal precedents. This particular case was chosen for analysis because many organizations, in fear of receiving liability outcomes, will deny opportunities to younger workers in favor of those in an age-related protected class. Though General Dynamics does not necessarily fit this profile, it was necessary to show how the language of the ADEA and similar legislation can be misinterpreted so that younger workers miss out on many workplace opportunities because of how the language is spelled ou t. Consider the following case that did meet with victory in the court system alleging reverse discrimination, where the business did deny opportunities to a non-protected class in favor of avoiding liability. The New Haven Fire Department had established a proficiency test to determine which firefighter candidates were most qualified to receive promotions. Detailed steps were undertaken to ensure that the tests were unbiased, â€Å"including painstaking analyses to ensure the tests

Why states obey the laws of war Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Why states obey the laws of war - Essay Example These laws and treaties have actualized an environment of self-regulations, so that the countries obeying it, have maximally minimized aggressive overtures against other countries as well as their own citizens. However, that is not the case all the time, as certain countries without obeying the international laws have acted or are acting aggressively and unilaterally. This gross violation of international laws by countries has raised doubts about the validity and efficacy of these laws. Even amidst these disobeying of laws, countries tend to obey laws due to certain reasons. States obey the laws and the related treaties and conventions due to mix of certain valid reasons, which mainly borders on self-interest and need for self-legitimacy, and also minimally due to coercion. Self interest constitutes various factors and one key factor is the want of the country to create a positive identity for itself. Participation in the transnational legal process and obeying all the laws helps â⠂¬Å"constitute the identity of the state as the one that obeys the law†. (Coleman). Importantly, they does not want to acquire the tag or reputation of a law breaker or a rogue nation, and thereby standing isolated and facing a barrage of debilitating sanctions. That is, if a nation continues to disobey the laws and thereby acts in a detrimental way against particular nations as well as global community on the whole, certain nations and also overseeing body like United Nations will impose economic sanctions, trade, food and other essential commodities embargoes, etc. These punitive actions will negatively impact the nation as well as its people. In order to avoid these scenarios, nations will tend to obey the laws. As another form of self interest, nations will obey laws to make or demand other nations to do the same. States will tend to obey laws whose underpinning political rational is clear and which they agree with, especially the laws relating to territorial integrity and inviolability of borders.(King 2005). Once obeying of law based on self-interest is done, then legitimacy will automatically fall into place. That is, states will always want legitimacy to its words and actions, and to get that they have to obey the laws. If they want other countries to be legitmate, they have to create and obey laws appropriately. This was validated by Professor Frank who states that legitimacy means that quality of law must derive from a perception, to those to whom it is addressed, that law has come into being in accordance with right process. (Rashid 2004). Even coercion and the resultant obeying of the law is also an extension of self-interest. When a state is coerced to obey laws through armed force or other means, they will accept it mainly from self-interest perspective. In certain cases, nations will obey laws as a form of nonconsensual coercion, but would like to exhibit as self-interest. The bottom line is, all states will want to live in peace, prosperi ty and in good coordination with other states and for that they will obey the international laws. When viewed from another perspective, certain States although generally act in accordance to the law, they do not always obey it. This happens mainly in the case of unilateral actions and importantly due to mis-interpretation of the laws according to their self-interests. Also, when certain States feel as they were not part of specific law making process, they are not obligated to follow that law. When states take unilateral actions to fulfil and pursue their self-interests, imperialistic ambitions, etc, they disobey and undermine the international laws. Although, they may be part of the law making process and could have acted in accordance with those laws most of the time, they could disobey. As an