110
CHAPTER 29
EMPLOYEES’ RIGHTS
Answers to Learning Objectives
1. Under federal law, an employer may not discriminate against employees on the basis of race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age over 40, or disability.
2. Employers are restricted from requiring invasive or offensive testing of employees and job
Lesson Outline
1. Many federal and state laws, municipal ordinances, and court decisions grant specific rights to
employees, but these rights are not identical for all employees.
2. The most important law governing employment discrimination and harassment on the basis of race,
color, religion, sex, and national origin is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
6. The Equal Pay Act requires employers to pay men and women equal pay for equal work unless the
payments are made on the basis of a seniority system, a merit system, quantity or quality of
production, or a differential resulting from any factor other than sex.
7. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits job discrimination against persons aged 40 or
over unless age is a true occupational qualification.
8. The Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits employment discrimination against qualified people
with disabilities. Employers must make “reasonable accommodations” to allow a qualified disabled
person to perform the essential functions of the job.
Chapter 29 Employees’ Rights
111
12. Many states bar employers from using DNA tests to discriminate among employees or prospective
employees. However, some employees use DNA tests for identification purposes.
Comments on Cases
(p. 344) While Riser clearly met the first element of a disparate treatment discrimination case and there
might have been argument about the second, once Target showed a nondiscriminatory reason for
Riser’s discharge, Riser had the burden of proving discrimination. Riser v. Target Corp., 458
F.3d 817 (8th Cir.)
(p. 347) The court stated that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find that age was a motivating
factor in New York Life’s employment decision This was sufficient to find a violation of the
ADEA. Morgan v. New York Life Ins. Co., 559 F.3d 425 (6th Cir.)
(p. 348) The court said the fact that supervisors had discussed their concerns regarding Willnerd’s voice
impediment and customers’ perceptions of Willnerd did not necessarily make the admissions
direct evidence of discriminatory behavior, since a reasonable jury could consider these
statements alongside any other evidence in assessing pretext and the question of discriminatory
intent. Willnerd v. First Nat. Nebraska, Inc., 558 F.3d 770 (8th Cir.)
Act liability. Ellis v. DHL Exp. Inc. (USA), 633 F.3d 522 (7th Cir.)
112
Answers to Questions
(Page 354)
1. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful for an employer to fail to hire, discharge, or to in
any way discriminate against anyone with respect to the terms, conditions, or privileges of
employment because of the individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
4. Exceptions to the pay requirements of the Equal Pay Act can be made if the payments are made on
the basis of: 1. A seniority system, 2. A merit system, 3. Quantity or quality of production, or 4. A
differential resulting from any factor other than sex.
5. The ADEA allows age discrimination when age is a true occupational qualification, such as the rule
that commercial pilots cannot be more than sixty years old.
6. Under the ADEA, the definition of employee excludes people elected to state or local office and
people appointed at the policy-making level.
10. To determine whether AIDS testing s reasonable courts balance the intrusion the testing would
cause on the constitutional rights of the person to be tested with the interests said to justify the
intrusion.
11. Because at-will employees can be discharged at any time, employers are free to terminate such
employees who refuse drug testing even when their jobs cannot be held to involve public safety.
12. The FMLA allows an employee to take an unpaid leave of up to 12 workweeks in a 12-month
period because of the birth, adoption, or foster care of the employee’s child, to care for the
employee’s spouse, child, or parent with a serious health condition, or because of a serious health
condition that makes the employee unable to perform the job.
Answers to Case Problems
(Page 355)
Chapter 29 Employees’ Rights
113
he had told his insurance company he was disabled. Macfarlan v. Ivy HillSNF, LLC, 675 F.3d 266
(3rd Cir.)
2. The court stated the hospital needed to staff the NICU with nurses who could guarantee some
regularity in their attendance. The court stated that an accommodation that allowed Samper to
“miss work whenever she felt she needed to and … for so long as she felt she needed to … [was] not
reasonable.” Samper v. Providence St. Vincent Medical Center, 675 F.3d 1233 (9th Cir.)
6. No. The court stated that the fact that 14 out of 19 fired employees were over 40 does not account
for any of these individuals’ circumstances, skills or performance. It also does not tell whether
14/19 was an excessive percentage of over age 40 terminations. Pippin v. Burlington Resources
Oil And Gas Co., 440 F.3d 1186 (10th Cir.)
7. No. The court stated that since SunTrust clearly would have terminated Worden even if it had not
had knowledge of the polygraph examination results, the termination was not based on the
polygraph tests and therefore there was no unlawful termination. Worden v. Sun Trust Banks, Inc.,
549 F.3d 334, (4th Cir.)