C H A P T E R 1 3
Civil Rights and Employment Discrimination
TRUE-FALSE QUESTIONS
1. Many states have passed their own fair employment acts.
2. The federal statutes on race, gender and employment discrimination apply both to employees and
independent contractors.
3. A plaintiff claiming disparate impact discrimination based on sex must prove that the employer
intentionally discriminated against him or her by denying a benefit or privilege of employment (such
as a promotion or pay raise) based upon the individual’s sex.
4. It is not necessary to prove intentional discrimination to prevail in a disparate impact case.
5. Plaintiffs in Title VII cases may only bring claims of harassment based on sex.
6. A claim for sexual harassment may be asserted by either male or female employees.
7. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a showing of a serious effect on an employee’s psychological
well-being is necessary for a hostile work environment claim under Title VII.
8. A majority of the federal courts of appeals have struck down claims for hostile work environment in
so-called paramour cases where coworkers have claimed that an employee has received preferential
treatment by a supervisor has a result of having sexual relations with the supervisor.
9. Federal legislation to amend Title VII to include sexual orientation has not been enacted.
10. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that sexual harassment must be committed by a member of the
opposite sex in order to be actionable.
11. To prevail on a claim for retaliation under Title VII, a plaintiff does not need to prevail on his or her
Title VII discrimination claim.
12. Under federal law there are no caps on either compensatory or punitive damages when sexual
discrimination is involved.
13. Discrimination on the basis of pregnancy is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII.
14. Gender will qualify as a BFOQ where a gender-based restriction is based on the preferences of
coworkers, employers, or customers for one sex or the other.
15. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) a person who is only regarded as having an
impairment that substantially limits one or more of that person’s major life activities cannot qualify
as disabled.
16. If two individuals aged 25 and 35 apply for the same position, under federal law the employer may
not lawfully reject either applicant on the basis of age.
17. Title VII has been successfully used to challenge English-only workplace rules.
18. Title VII provides that an employer may lawfully hire an individual on the basis of religion, sex, or
national origin if religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification.
19. Under federal law, employees may not waive their rights under the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act (ADEA).
20. A reasonable accommodation for a disabled employee is required whether or not it would impose an
undue hardship on the employer.
MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS
1. What is the major provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (Section 1981)?
A. It prohibits racial discrimination by employers of over 50 employees in the making and
enforcement of contracts, including employment contracts.
B. It prohibits racial discrimination by employers of any size in the making and enforcement of
contracts, excluding employment contracts.
C. It prohibits racial discrimination by employers of any size in the making and enforcement of
contracts, including employment contracts.
D. It prohibits racial discrimination by employers of over 25 employees in the making and
CHAPTER 13 CIVIL RIGHTS AND EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION 191
enforcement of contracts, including employment contracts.
2. What is the major provision of the Equal Pay Act of 1963?
A. It mandates equal pay for equal work without regard to gender.
B. It mandates equal pay for equal work without regard to gender or age.
C. It mandates equal pay for equal work without regard to gender, race, or age.
D. It mandates equal pay for equal work without regard to race.
3. What did the U.S. Supreme Court rule in Ricci v. DeStefano, the case in the text involving whether
an employer, due to fear of disparate impact discrimination litigation, may refuse to certify test
results that would make a disproportionate number of white candidates eligible for promotion in
comparison with minority candidates ?
A. That the employer had engaged in illegal disparate impact discrimination.
B. That the employer had engaged in illegal disparate treatment discrimination.
C. That the employer had acted appropriately because there was a credible threat of a lawsuit.
D. That the employer had acted appropriately both because there was a credible threat of a lawsuit
and because the employer had established, using objective facts, that such a lawsuit could not be
afforded.
4. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on which of the following?
A. Race, color, and religion.
B. Race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age.
C. Race, color, religion, and sex.
D. Race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.
5. Which of the following must the plaintiff prove in an Age Discrimination in Employment case?
A. The plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of direct evidence that age was a motivating factor
for the challenged employer decision.
B. The plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence, which may be direct or
circumstantial, that age was a motivating factor for the challenged employer decision.
C. The plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of direct evidence that age was the but–for cause of
the challenged employer decision.
D. The plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence, which may be direct or
circumstantial, that age was the but-for cause of the challenged employer decision.
192 MANAGERS AND THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT
6. Which of the following is true regarding the filing of a claim under Title VII?
A. There is no requirement that a claim be filed with the EEOC so long as a complaint is filed by a
private lawyer within six months after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.
B. Although there is not a requirement that a plaintiff first file a charge of discrimination with the
EEOC, a plaintiff who does not file a charge may only recover back pay from the date a court action
is filed.
C. A plaintiff must file a charge with the EEOC, but the plaintiff may also personally institute a
court action to run concurrently with the EEOC investigation.
D. A plaintiff is required to file a charge with the EEOC; but in the event the EEOC does not pursue
the matter, the plaintiff may proceed personally after receiving a right–to–sue letter from the EEOC.
7. How long must an employee have worked for an employer in order to be eligible for leave provided
by the Family and Medical Leave Act?
A. Two years
B. Twelve months
C. Six months
D. 120 days
8. Which of the following is generally true regarding front pay in discrimination cases?
A. It is a substitute for back pay.
B. It is equal to one-half the back pay amount.
C. It is a substitute for back pay and is generally awarded in addition to reinstatement.
D. It is equal to what the employee would have received had he or she not been discharged and is
generally awarded when reinstatement is inappropriate.
9. Which of the following is generally true regarding an award of lost future earnings in discrimination
cases?
A. Damages for lost future earnings are generally available so long as front pay is not awarded.
B. Damages for lost future earnings may be awarded in addition to damages for front pay.
C. Damages for lost future earnings are not available if either an award of back pay or front pay is
given.
D. Damages for lost future earnings are not available.
10. An employee may use the Family and Medical Leave Act for
A. the birth of a child
B. the care of a parent
C. a serious personal health condition rendering the employee unable to do his or her job or the birth
of a child
D. the birth of a child, the care of a parent, a serious personal health condition rendering the
employee unable to do his or her job
11. What did the U.S. Supreme Court rule regarding the effect on a Title VII claim of after-acquired
evidence meaning evidence found during the course of discovery in a lawsuit that an employee
violated company rules?
A. The court ruled that under such circumstances, the plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed.
B. The court ruled that under such circumstances, remedies available to the plaintiff should be
limited to back pay and should not include reinstatement or front pay.
C. The court ruled that under such circumstances, remedies available to the plaintiff should be
limited to back pay and front pay and should not include reinstatement.
D. The court ruled that such evidence has no effect on the lawsuit or on available remedies.
12. Which of the following was the result in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., the case in
the text involving whether a clothing retailer whose image is based on the look of its sales
personnel, was required to make an exception for a potential employee who for religious reasons
insisted on wearing a head scarf inconsistent with the company’s dress code?
A. That the employer did not have to accommodate the wearing of the scarf because wearing the
scarf involved a cultural practice, not a practice required by the potential employee’s religion.
B. That the employer did not have to accommodate the wearing of the scarf because the employer
established that it did not involve a sincerely held religious belief on the part of the potential
employee.
C. That the employer did not have to accommodate the wearing of the scarf because such
accommodation would place an undue hardship on the employer.
D. That the employer violated Title VII when it did not hire the potential employee based on her
insistence on wearing the head scarf.
13. Which of the following was the result in Holcomb v Iona College, the case referenced in the text
involving a lawsuit by a white assistant coach of a college basketball team who alleged that he was
fired because he was married to an African American woman?
A. The court ruled that Title VII was inapplicable to such claims.
B. The court ruled that Title VII was inapplicable because a private college, as opposed to a public
college, was involved.
194 MANAGERS AND THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT
C. The court ruled that Title VII protects the parties involved in a racially mixed marriage, but that
in other situations, such as dating relationships, Title VII would not apply.
D. The court ruled that Title VII protects employees from discrimination based on their association
with a person of a different race.
14. Which of the following was the result in International Union United Automobile, Aerospace &
Agriculture Implement Workers of America, UAW, v. Johnson Controls, Inc., the case referenced in
the text before the U.S. Supreme Court involving a fetal-protection policy of an employer barring a
woman from jobs involving exposure to lead unless her inability to bear children was medically
documented?
A. That the policy was a facially discriminatory policy forbidden under Title VII.
B. That the policy was a facially discriminatory policy forbidden under Title VII unless the
employer had documented proof that the exposure would likely harm a developing fetus.
C. That the policy was allowable under Title VII unless the female employee had documented proof
that the exposure would not likely harm a developing fetus.
D. That the policy was allowable under Title VII so long as the employer had a good faith belief
that the exposure would harm a developing fetus.
15. What did the U.S. Supreme Court conclude in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, the case referenced in
the text in which a female was denied partnership in an accounting firm after being told that to
improve her chances for partnership, she should walk more femininely, talk more femininely, dress
more femininely, wear make-up, have her hair styled, and wear jewelry?
A. That the employer committed sexual stereotyping constituting illegal discrimination.
B. That the employer committed sexual stereotyping, but that such stereotyping did not constitute
illegal discrimination.
C. That the employer committed sexual stereotyping but that in such cases, only nominal (minimal)
damages are available.
D. That while such statements constituted sexual stereotyping, the employer could avoid liability if
it could show that it had received client complaints regarding the female’s masculine–type qualities.
16. Denial of promotion in retaliation for a person’s refusal to respond to his or her supervisor’s sexual
advances is referred to as ________ harassment.
A. sina qua non
B. quid pro quo
C. actual
D. constructive
17. Which of the following was the result in the U.S. Supreme Court case in the text, Thompson v. North
American Stainless, LP, involving whether a man could sue for retaliation under Title VII after he
was fired because his fiancée had filed a complaint of discrimination against their mutual employer?
A. The case was dismissed because the man was not personally subjected to discrimination.
B. The case was dismissed because the man was not personally subjected to discrimination and was
not married to the person discriminated against.
C. The Court ruled that the man could sue for retaliation but that his remedies were limited to
reinstatement.
D. The court ruled that the man could sue for retaliation and did not limit his remedies.
18. What did the U.S. Supreme Court rule in Echazabal v. Chevron USA, Inc., in which the plaintiff
sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) after the defendant refused to allow the
plaintiff to work in its refinery because of his liver disease and concerns regarding his health?
A. The Court ruled that under the ADA an employer is authorized to refuse to hire an individual if
the individual’s performance on the job would endanger his or her own health owing to a disability.
B. The Court ruled that under the ADA an employer is only authorized to refuse to hire an
individual if the individual’s performance on the job would in any manner endanger another
employee’s health.
C. The Court ruled that under the ADA an employer is only authorized to refuse to hire an
individual if he or she has a communicable disease.
D. The Court ruled that under the ADA an employer may not take into consideration a health
condition that would present a problem to the applicant or others. The employer may only consider
whether the applicant has the skills to do the job.
19. The ________ is the primary enforcer of civil rights legislation in the United States.
A. Department of Commerce
B. Department of the Treasury
C. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
D. Section 1981 requirement
20. In quid pro quo sexual harassment cases and hostile environment cases, the employer is always
vicariously liable under the ______ standard when a supervisor takes a tangible employment action
against a subordinate.
A. negligence-in-support-relation
B. aided-in-the-agency-relation
C. federal-directive
D. assisted-in-the-creation
21. Under the EEOC, gender will qualify as a BFOQ where a gender-based restriction is based on
A. assumptions of the comparative employment characteristics of women in general.
B. the rights of others to privacy.
C. stereotyped characterizations of the sexes.
D. sex but not age.
22. The principal federal law prohibiting discrimination in employment on the basis of age is
A. Title VII.
B. ADEA.
C. OWBPA.
D. EEOC.
23. Under federal law, individuals under the age _____ have no protection from discrimination based on
age.
A. 40
B. 50
C. 55
D. 60
24. Leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act is
A. paid leave.
B. unpaid leave.
C. paid leave for 3 weeks and then unpaid.
D. paid leave for 10 weeks and then unpaid.
25. Under the Family and Medical Leave Act, eligible employees are entitled to ____ weeks of leave per
year.
A. 10
B. 20
C. 12
D. 5
26. Which of the following was the result in Green v. Franklin National Bank of Minneapolis, the case
in the text in which the plaintiff sued the defending bank after a co-worker employee of the bank
called her “monkey” and used other slurs?
A. That the statements were sufficient to create a hostile work environment and that the plaintiff
could recover regardless of whether the defending employer took prompt and appropriate remedial
action against the offending employee.
B. That the statements were sufficient to create a hostile work environment but that the plaintiff
could not recover because the defending employer took prompt and appropriate remedial action
against the offending employee.
C. That the statements were insufficient to create a hostile work environment.
D. That the statements were insufficient to create a hostile work environment and also that the
plaintiff failed to follow the employer’s complaint procedure.
27. Which of the following does Executive Order 11246 require that federal contractors include in every
nonexempt government contract?
A. An agreement not to discriminate in employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin.
B. An agreement to hire a certain quota of minorities.
C. An agreement to perform audits of discriminatory practices.
D. An agreement to hire a certain quota of minorities and an agreement to perform audits of
discriminatory practices.
28. Which of the following is true regarding India’s discrimination protection?
A. Indian anti-discrimination law has developed quickly since the implementation of the Indian
Constitution.
B. Because of strongly held citizen beliefs, the Indian government has not taken action in regard to
the employment of lower caste members.
C. The Indian Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment in the workplace as a personal injury to
the affected woman and a violation of her fundamental human rights.
D. While India has not indicated a significant interest in protecting the rights of women, the India
Supreme Court issued a specific directive prohibiting age discrimination.
29. Which of the following is true regarding Japan’s discrimination protection?
A. The Japanese constitution does not address discrimination.
B. Japanese statutory law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race and national origin.
C. Japanese statutory law prohibits sex discrimination.
D. Japanese law does not address employment discrimination in regard to hiring based on age.
198 MANAGERS AND THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT
30. Richard is starting a new security service. He tells his attorney, Kiera, that while he plans to prohibit
all acts of discrimination and harassment, he cannot be all places at all times. Richard asks Kiera if
there is anything he can do to limit his liability. What should she tell him?
A. She should tell him that he has nothing to worry about because as long as he has a rule
prohibiting harassment, he cannot be held liable for acts of supervisors.
B. She should tell him that there is nothing he can do because under the law, he is automatically
liable for any acts of harassment committed by supervisors.
C. She should tell him that he should have a policy provided to all employees offering to correct any
offensive conduct, and that an unreasonable failure by an employee to take advantage of corrective
opportunities offered through the policy would help him avoid liability.
D. She should tell him that he should take advantage of a loophole in Title VII that allows business
owners to opt out of the harassment provisions of Title VII.
31. Miranda is a cashier at Super Store. Saturday is their busiest day. She tells her supervisor Sam that
she needs to be off every Saturday because that is the religious holiday for the religion to which she
has recently converted. What are Sam’s obligations to Miranda?
A. He has an absolute obligation under the law to let her off every Saturday unless he can prove that
she is not using the time for religious observance.
B. He cannot fire her based on her religious beliefs, but he has no duty to let her off on the busiest
day of the week.
C. Under the law, he must allow her to be off as requested, but only if she can establish that under
the tenants of her religious beliefs she is doomed if she does not attend worship services regularly.
D. He must make reasonable accommodations for her unless doing so would cause undue hardship
on the business.
32. Trudy, a female manager at ABC Company, was surprised to learn that one of her male employees
had accused her of sexual harassment. Trudy denied all charges. After a long and expensive battle
in court, the jury ruled in favor of ABC Company on all charges. A few days after the trial, Trudy’s
supervisor fired her for no apparent reason. Trudy obtained evidence in the form of interoffice
memos that she was fired because of the charges brought against her. Trudy thought that was unfair
because she was completely vindicated by the jury. Are any remedies available to her under Title
VII?
A. No remedies are available to her under Title VII because it only protects victims of
discrimination and harassment along with witnesses testifying in support.
B. Trudy can sue under Title VII only if she can establish that men had been treated differently
when accused of harassment.
C. Trudy can sue under Title VII only if she can establish the existence of an employment contract
whereby she can only be discharged for just cause.
CHAPTER 13 CIVIL RIGHTS AND EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION 199
D. At least one court has ruled that Trudy has a cause of action under Title VII based upon
retaliation.
Fact Pattern 13-1 (Questions 33-34 apply)
Sam, who is age 60, was told by Big Company that he was being laid off. Sam was offered a
severance package of $5,000 if he would waive his rights to sue for age discrimination under the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Sam believed that his age was a factor in the decision to
lay him off; but he really needed the money, so he signed an agreement whereby Big Company
agreed to pay him $5,000 and he agreed to waive his rights against Big Company for age
discrimination. Sam was given seven days to consider whether to enter into the agreement, and the
agreement provided that it was final the date it was signed.
33. Refer to fact pattern 13-1. Did the agreement Sam signed comply with the Older Workers’ Benefit
Protection Act?
A. No, because it did not give Sam at least twenty-one days to consider whether to enter into the
agreement.
B. No, because it did not give Sam at least seven days following execution of the agreement during
which he could revoke it.
C. No, because it did not give Sam at least twenty-one days to consider whether to enter into the
agreement, and also because it did not give Sam at least seven days following execution of the
agreement during which he could revoke it.
D. Yes, it complied with the act.
34. Refer to fact pattern 13-1. Does Sam have any rights to sue Big Company for age discrimination?
A. No.
B. Yes, because although the agreement complied with the Older Workers’ Benefit Protection Act,
Sam has six months in which to renounce the agreement and sue for age discrimination.
C. Yes, because the agreement did not comply with the Older Workers’ Benefit Protection Act, Sam
can sue the company for age discrimination but only if he returns the severance payment.
D. Yes, because the agreement did not comply with the Older Workers’ Benefit Protection Act, Sam
can sue the company for age discrimination without having to return the severance payment.
35. Sneaky opened a new dress shop catering to college aged students. Sneaky advertised for sales
associates but would only hire applicants who had been trained in computer skills in high school.
Sally, age 50, was denied employment on the basis that although she was highly skilled in computer
usage, she obtained her training after high school. Computer training was not available in Sally’s
high school nor was it typically available in high schools during that time period. Sally sued for age
discrimination. Sneaky denied liability pointing out that his advertisement only referred to computer
200 MANAGERS AND THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT
training. It in no way referenced an age requirement. Sneaky claimed that the fact that all his
associates were younger was simply a coincidence. Which of the following is true regarding Sally’s
claim?
A. Sneaky should win because he was entitled to require high-school based computer training.
B. Sneaky should win unless Sally can obtain evidence that Sneaky intentionally used the
requirement to discriminate based upon age.
C. Sally should win under a disparate treatment theory if she can show that the requirement
systematically excludes individuals protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
D. Sally should win under a disparate impact theory if she can show that the requirement
systematically excludes individuals protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
ESSAY QUESTIONS
1. Discuss in detail the response of the EEOC in regard to the protection from discrimination of
temporary workers supplied by an employment agency along with remedies available to temporary
employees suffering discrimination.
2. Set forth the categories of individuals classified as disabled under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
3. Specifically set forth what courts consider in order to determine whether there is a hostile or abusive
work environment.
4. Bob, age 60, works at Big Company as an assistant manager and has been approached by his
supervisor, Sue, on several occasions for a date. She makes lewd and inappropriate comments to
him that are very embarrassing. Bob complained to Selina, the president of Big Company, but no
CHAPTER 13 CIVIL RIGHTS AND EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION 201
action was taken. In fact, Selina told him that he should feel lucky that Sue was interested in an old
guy like him and proceeded to tell several jokes involving age and sexual performance. Again, Bob
was humiliated and embarrassed. Bob complained to the Equal Employment Commission regarding
what he believed was inappropriate conduct involving the requests for dates, and references to sex
and age. Selina was told by the Commission representative that she needed to put a stop to
inappropriate behavior. A few days later, Bob was told that he was being demoted. He was replaced
by a 25 year old female. What causes of action, if any, would Bob have?
5. Susan goes to work for Fashion Company, a U.S. company that has a branch in a repressive Middle
Eastern country. Susan agrees to transfer to the Middle Eastern country. After working there for
several months she notices that men who are less qualified are promoted to managerial jobs for
which she has applied. Susan tells her supervisor, Will, that she is going to sue the company under
Title VII because she is being discriminated against on the basis of her sex. He tells her to forget it
because Title VII does not apply outside the U.S. He also tells her that even if he wanted to promote
her, which he does not, the law in the Middle Eastern country prohibits the promotion of women into
managerial positions. Susan tells him that he is nuts because she is fully protected as a U.S. citizen
working for a U.S. company. Who is right and why?