The EEOC reports that there are over 27 million eligible employees with disabilities in the United States, yet the unemployment rate for disabled people has consistently outpaced that of the general population – 12.9 % in 2012 versus 8.7% for others.

U.S. Secretary of Labor, Hilda L. Solis, in an attempt to lower the disabled unemployment rate, has introduced a quota system that could change the way federal contracts are administered.  This quota would require most firms that contract or subcontract with the federal government, to have disabled people make-up 7% of their workforce or more than 50 employees. This change will ultimately allow a greater number of disabled and unemployed individuals  to procure jobs.

While some companies believe that this could cause more problems within the workforce, and ultimately lower their productivity, others are embracing this possible change.  The Executive Diversity Council of Lockheed Martin, explained that they believe that by employing people with disabilities created a more diverse, compassionate, supportive, and flexible workplace environment.   Incorporating “reasonable accommodations” for a disabled employee has a positive impact on an organizational culture, promoting teamwork, reducing conflict and affirming a sense of community and meaning in people’s daily work.  More importantly, respecting people with disabilities is a highly visible value for all “employees.”

To learn more about the disability rights in the workplace please consult our Disabilities Rights page or our Resources section of our website or, if you feel like you have been discriminated against for a disability, please contact us.

Their boss would call them “grandpas,” “old farts,”and “old bastards.”  So when the eight Texas dockworkers, who all are at least 50 years old, were fired on August 27, 2007 and replaced with younger hires, they thought something discriminatory might be going on.

According to the EEOC, the Company claimed that this was solely a “reduction in force,” however the managers had been tasked with preparing a list of the men to be terminated.  The Company also changed its attendance and disciplinary policy so that the men, who had not had more than a few disciplinary write-ups, were suddenly put on corrective action and eligible for termination under the new policy.

The EEOC filed charges under the  Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 which prohibits discrimination in hiring, terms and conditions, or termination based upon a person’s age. It specifically defines a protected class of employees as those employees over the age of 40 years.

As a result, Central Freight Lines, Inc. not only agreed to pay the men almost half a million dollars, it also plans to create a written age-discrimination policy and train its managers in discrimination law.   The employees of Central Freight Lines stand to benefit, as many of them stay at the Company for a very long while.

If you feel like you have been discriminated against because of your age, please contact us.

A study conducted at The University of Manchester and Monash University, Melbourne, was published in the International Journal of Obesity, examined whether a recently developed measure of anti-fat prejudice, the universal measure of bias (UMB), predicted actual obesity job discrimination.

“Participants viewed a series of resumes that had a small photo of the job applicant attached, and were asked to make ratings of the applicants suitability, starting salary, and employability,” said Dr. O’Brien.  “We used pictures of women pre-and post-bariatric surgery, and varied whether participants saw either a resume that had a picture of an obese female (BMI 38-41) attached, or the same female but in a normal weight range (BMI 22-24) following bariatric surgery.”

Dr. O’Brien said one interpretation of this finding might be that we feel better about our own bodies if we compare ourselves to, and discriminate against, fatter people.  “The results suggest that a belief in the superiority of some individuals over others is related to the perception that obese individuals deserve fewer privileges and opportunities, than non-fat individuals ,” he said.

Dr. O’Brien added that “there is a clear need to address obesity discrimination, particularly against females, who tend to bear the brunt of anti-fat prejudice.”

Such discrimination raises legal issues of disability discrimination.  Additionally, where there is a clear bias against females that are obese obvious gender discrimination issues arise.

If you feel like you have been discriminated against at your workplace, please contact us.

After the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, which prohibits “sex discrimination on the basis of pregnancy,” many women found themselves working while pregnant.  Most women work up to birth of their child.  During the last 30 years however, the increase in women becoming demoted, fired, or having their wages cut after their pregnancy became evident that Pregnancy Discrimination is not going away.

A Times Healthland article called “Pregnant at work? Why your job could be at risk,” written by Bonnie Rochman, explains that, “Since 2001, the agency has handled 52,000 pregnancy cases that amounted to $150.5 million dollars in damages.”  “Pregnancy discrimination persists in the 21st Century workplace, unnecessarily depriving women of the means to support their families,” said Jacqueline Berrien, Chairwoman of the EEOC.

Women comprise 47% of this Country’s workforce, and are the primary wage provider or co-provider in nearly two-thirds of families.  This is why pregnancy Discrimination needs to be stopped.   Women continue to hope for the possibility of better enforcement of the existing laws protecting their rights during and after pregnancy.  For the time being, it is important that women know their rights under the present laws, and if they encounter discrimination, they need to keep a notebook of all the incidents, and seek the advice of an attorney.

 
The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 states:

1. No woman should be discriminated based upon pregnancy, childbirth, or any other pregnancy-related conditions.

2. The Employer should be able to accommodate reasonable requests.

3. Employers are required to treat women affected by a pregnancy related condition the same as other employees according to their ability or inability to work.  If, for instance, fringe benefits, such as sick leave and health insurance are provided for employees suffering from non-pregnancy-related disabilities, then the same benefits must be provided for women suffering from pregnancy-related disabilities.

4. Employers also cannot impose terms and conditions upon pregnant female employees that are not made applicable to employees with other types of medical conditions.

5. What is required simply is that employers do not discriminate between pregnancy-related conditions and other temporary disabilities.

To Read more on Pregnancy Discrimination visit our Pregnancy Discrimination page.