From: Date: 11/25/2014
Re: Title VII
I have researched the following in reference to the disgruntled employees Title VII claim and have formulated the following thoughts and possible responses:
1. Aspect of Constructive Discharge that relate to this case
a. Constructive discharge can be sought by an employee when the employee claims the company has made the working conditions unbearable and therefore has no other choice except to quit. This is significant because usually when an employee quits, they cannot sue the company for wrongful termination, and cannot claim unemployment benefits. However, in the situation where the employee feels the employer ...view middle of the document...
The employee should have made a claim in writing that the working condition is intolerable and why the working condition is intolerable. They must give the company at least 15 days to respond to the constructive discharge claim. If the employee felt they could not work during the time the constructive discharge is made, they must submit this information in writing to the company. An unpaid or paid leave must then be granted during that time. The employee must have guidance of how to make a constructive discharge claim in conspicuous places and/or in the employee handbook. If the employee did not make the claim in writing, they may waive the right to notice. In addition, when the employer does respond to the employee communication concerning the constructive discharge, they are protected and are not considered admission by the employer that they have committed an action that could allow a claim or action against the company.
The employee did not have to make a claim in writing if they felt the working conditions were ‘over the top’ like a sexual harassment charge. This case does not seem to fit that situation.
In conclusion concerning the constructive discharge claim and this employee the following questions need to be answered.
* Did the employee make a claim in writing?
* If they did, did the company respond and what was the response?
* If they did not make a claim in writing, was the company notified that the change in schedule was violating this employees religious guidelines? If so, to who and when? What was the response by the employee.
This is important because there was likely some creative scheduling and options that could have been put into place discussed later in this memo.
2. The employee is making a Title VII claim concerning a “protected category”. The employee is disgrutled because he must work on what is considered a “Holy Day” for him. This would fall under the protected category of religion. Title VII protected categories include race, color, sex, religion and national orgin. We can not completely decide that religion is the only protected category that applies in this situation with the little information we know, but religion definitely applies. Religious discriminitation as defined by the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commision, “involves treating a person unfavorable because of his or her religious beliefs. The law protects not only people who belong to traditional, organized religions, such as Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism, but also others who have sincerely held religious, ethical or moral beliefs.” (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2014). In this situation, one must make accomodations unless the employer is able to make the argument that changing his shift would cause undue hardship by being more costly, compromising workplace safety, decreasing workplace efficiency, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially...