Reference no: EM133005401

Follow the order of the legislation as listed here.dentify the name legislation.

Provide 3 important points of each law  in a bullet-style format.  A sentence for each bullet is sufficient.

the legislation listed

• Equal Pay Act of 1963
• Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Amended in 1972
• Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978
• Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 - Amended in 1978, 1986
• Rehabilitation Act of 1973
• Americans with Disability Act of 1990 - Amended 2008
• Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986
• Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) of 1994

Equal Pay Act of 1963, Amended in 1972 

Passed as an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act (EPA) of 1963 pro- hibits an employer from paying women less money than men if both employees do work that is substantially the same. The EPA was passed largely to overcome the outdated belief that a man should be paid more than a woman because he was the primary breadwinner. The pay gap has declined through the years; however, one still exists as indicated in the FYI feature. The EPA covers work within the same physical place of business. For example, an employer could pay a female more in San Francisco than a male working in the same position in Slippery Rock, Pennsylvania, even if the jobs were substantially the same, because of the cost-of-living

Pregnancy discrimination act of 1978

Prior to the passage of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), most pregnant women did not receive the same protections afforded to others under Title VII. Many women argued pregnancy should be specified as a protected class in Title VII. Efforts to amend Title VII were met with resistance by lawmakers, particularly following the Supreme Court decision in 1976. In General Electric v. Gilbert, the court ruled that excluding pregnancy as a condition qualifying for coverage under a disability plan did not constitute sex discrimination. Excluding pregnancy divided employees into two groups, one that was exclusively women and the other that included both women and men; thus, the distinction was not mainly sex-based. Members of the feminist movement and civil rights activists refused to accept this ruling, pressuring Congress to amend Title VII and overturn the Gilbert decision. Their efforts were successful In 1978, Congress passed the PDA. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act prohibits discrimination in employment based on preg- nancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The basic principle of the act is that women affected by pregnancy and related conditions must be treated the same as other applicants and employees based on their ability or inability to work. A woman is therefore protected against such practices as being fired or refused a job or promotion merely because she is pregnant or has had an abortion. She usually cannot be forced to take a leave of absence if she can work. If other employees on disability leave are entitled to return to their jobs when they can work again, so too are women who have been unable to work because of pregnancy. Also, limiting job advancement opportunities while a woman is pregnant may be a violation of the act. Questions regarding a woman's family and childbearing plans should not be asked. Such questions may be viewed as discriminatory because they are not asked of men. The same principle applies in the employee benefits area, including disability benefits, sick leave, and health insurance. A woman unable to work for pregnancy-related reasons is entitled to disability benefits or sick leave on the same basis as employees unable to work for other medical reasons. Also, any health insurance provided must cover expenses for pregnancy-related conditions on the same basis as expenses for other medical conditions.

Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Amended in 1978, and 1990 

Older workers were often discriminated against by employers based on the belief that they were less able to perform as well as younger workers. Also, many companies avoided hiring older workers because they expected to receive a lower return on investment from training. Statistically speaking, older workers will have fewer years remaining on the job than younger workers. In 2015, the median age of the labor force was 42.3 years, and nearly 55 percent of them were at least 40 old.° The number of older individuals will increase for many years to come, particularly individuals at least 55 years among years of age.' As originally enacted, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibited employers from discriminating against individuals who were 40 to 65 years old. The 1978 amend- ment provided protection for individuals who were at least 40, but less than 70 years old. In a 1986 amendment, employer discrimination against anyone age 40 or older is illegal. Questions asked about an applicant's age or date of birth may be ill-advised. Also, if only younger applicants are more eager and ready to learn new technology may bring an age discrimination suit because people of any age may possess these qualities. However, a firm may ask for age information to comply with the child labor law. For example, the question could be asked, "Are you under the of 18?" Nonetheless, questions about the ages of children, if any, could be potentially discrimina- tory because a close approximation of the applicant's age often is obtained through knowledge of the age of the applicant's children. ages The Older Workers Benefit Protection Act-the 1990 amendment to the ADEA-focused on employer benefits practices. When employers require that all employees contribute toward coverage of benefits, under circumstances, they can also require older employees to pay more for health care, disability, or life insurance than younger employees. This is the case because these benefits generally become costlier with age (e.g., older workers may be more likely to incur seri- ous illnesses, thus, insurance companies may charge employers higher rates). However, an older employee may not be required to pay more for the benefit as a condition of employment. Where the premium has increased for an older employee, the employer must provide three options to older workers. First, the employee has the option of withdrawing from the benefit plan altogether. Second, the employee has the option of reducing his or her benefit coverage to keep the same cost. Third, an older employee may be offered the option of paying more for the benefit to avoid otherwise justified reductions in coverage. The EEOC is responsible for administering tho ADEA. This act pertains to employers who have 20 or more employees for 20 or more calendar weeks (either in the current or preceding calendar year); unions with 25 or more members; employment agencies; and federal, state, and local government subunits. Enforcement begins when a charge is filed, but the EEOC can review compliance even if no charge is filed. The ADEA differs from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act because it provides for trial by jury and carries possible criminal penalty for violation of the act. The trial-by-jury provi- sion is important because juries are thought to have great sympathy for older people who may have been discriminated against. The criminal penalty provision means that a person may receive more than lost wages if discrimination is proved. Further, an employer found to have wilfully violated the ADEA can be liable to the victimized person for "liquidated damages" or double damages. The 1978 amendment also makes class action suits possible

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 

The Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination against disabled workers who are employed by certain government contractors and subcontractors and organizations that receive federal grants more than $2,500. Individuals are considered disabled if they have a physical or mental impair- ment that substantially limits one or more major life activities or if they have a record of such impairment. Protected under the act are diseases and conditions such as epilepsy, cancer, cardio- vascular disorders, AIDS, blindness, deafness, mental retardation [language stated in the act], emotional disorders, and dyslexia. There are two primary levels of the act. All federal contractors or subcontractors exceed- ing the $2,500 base are required to post notices that they agree to take affirmative action to recruit, employ, and promote qualified disabled individuals. If the contract or subcontract exceeds $50,000, or if the contractor has 50 or more employees, the employer must prepare a written affir- mative action plan for review by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), which administers the act. In it, the contractor must specify that reasonable steps are being taken mi 8005 to hire and promote disabled persons. In an interpretation of Section 8 of the Rehabilitation Act, federal technology buyers are forced to think about people who are blind, deaf, paralyzed, or have other disabilities before they buy software, computers, printers, copiers, fax machines, kiosks, telecommunications devices, or video and multimedia products. Federal employees with disabilities must have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access and use by federal employees who are not individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be imposed on the agency. Viot Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) provides pro- tection to Reserve and National Guard members. Under the USERRA, those workers are entitled to return to their civilian employment after completing their military service. The USERRA is intended to eliminate or minimize employment disadvantages to civilian careers that can result from service in the uniformed services. The USERRA was enacted to protect the reemployment benefits and nondiscrimination rights of individuals who voluntarily or involuntarily take a leave of absence from employment to serve in the military. As a rule, a returning employee is entitled to reemployment in the same job or position that he or she would have attained with reasonable certainty if not for the absence to serve in the military. Known as the escalator principle, this requirement is designed to ensure that a returning employee is not penalized (by losing a pay raise, promotion, etc.) for the time spent on active duty, not exceeding five years. To accomplish this, organizations should track factors ranging from compensation to promotions that employees would have received had they not been on military leave. There are no special rights under USERRA for temporary workers or the new hires taking over the Reserve or National Guide members' jobs. The Veterans Opportunity to Work (VOW) Act passed in 2011 amended the USERRA. It is now easier for employees to sue employers based on hostile work environment claims related to an employee's military status. In 2015, 39.6 percent of USERRA cases contained allegations of discrimination based on past, present or future military service or status, and 18.7 percent involved allegations of improper reinstatement into civilian jobs following military service.1º USERRA is administered by the U.S. Department of Labor. 15

Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) makes it illegal for certain employers to fire or refuse to hire a person based on that person's national origin or citizenship. This law also makes it illegal for an employer to request employment verification only from people of a certain national origin or only from people who appear to be from a foreign country. An employer who has citizen- ship requirements or gives preference to U.S. citizens also may violate IRCA.

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that approximately 9.8 million disabled individua were employed." The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination aga qualified individuals with disabilities. The ADA prohibits discrimination in all employment prac- tices, including job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, training. and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. It applies to recruitment, advertising. tenure, layoffs, leaves, benefits, and all other employment-related activities. The employment provisions apply to private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies, and labor unions. Persons discriminated against because they have a known association or relationship with a disabled individual are also protected. Employers with 15 or more employees are covered. The ADA defines an individual with a disability as a person who has, or is regarded as having, a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities and has a record of such an impairment or is regarded as having such an impairment.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Amended in 1972 

The statute that has had the greatest impact on EEO is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment Act of 1972. Under Title VII, it is illegal for an employer to discriminate in hiring, firing, promoting, compensating, or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. The act also forbids retali- ation against an employee who has participated in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing. For instance, Merrill Lynch & Co. paid $160 million to settle an employment discrimination lawsuit filed by black broker George McReynolds on behalf of 700 black brokers who worked for Mer- rill (McReynolds, et al. v. Merrill Lynch & Co). McReynolds claimed that the company gave white brokers more lucrative accounts while also denying black employees equal pay and career advancement opportunities. Since the passage of this law, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC. discussed shortly). broadened its interpretation of sex discrimination and "enforces Title VII's prohibition of sex discrimination as forbidding any employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity." In recent years, the EEOC has filed lawsuits in various courts tackling an assortment of LGBT discrimination-related issues including sexual orientation and transgender employees. For example, in EEOC v. Pallet Companies d/b/a IFCO Sys. North Am., Inc., the EEOC alleged that Pallet Companies illegally terminated a lesbian employee based on sexual orientation after she complained about harassment. Discrimination cases involving trans- gender employees are becoming increasingly common. For instance, in EEOC v. Lakeland Eye Clinic, P.A., the EEOC alleged that Lakeland Eye Clinic discriminated based on sex because it fired an employee who was transitioning from male to female and did not conform to gender-based expectations. In both cases, the employees' job performance was satisfactory. The companies in each case settled the claims out of court. Issues such as these can present challenges in terms of how we perceive ourselves and those around us. The following Watch It video looks at ways in which managers may react to an employee's gender transitioning.