I need help with a Law question. All explanations and answers will be used to help me learn.
Formatting is: 1” margins all around, double spaced, Times New Roman 12-point font.
It has to be more than one and a half page for each question. ‘
Most laws banning discrimination are “federal” laws, meaning they originated in the US Congress (statutory law) or federal courts (common law). Title VII, the ADEA, the PDA, etc., are all “federal” laws. But, federal laws don’t provide all the protections against discrimination that we enjoy today. Naturally, “state” law provides additional protections not covered by federal law. Research this topic and identify, in your own words, what additional protected classifications are covered by various state laws. Make sure to pay special attention to Nevada. In your paper, I want you to offer an explanation why federal law doesn’t cover all the protected classifications that exist. For example, why wouldn’t Congress pass a federal law that prohibits discrimination against married people? Some states do. Why are some protected classifications left to the states?
If a person wishes to sue an employer for discrimination in violation of Title VII, she or he must first give the EEOC a chance to resolve the dispute. First, what is the EEOC? What does the EEOC do? Where does the EEOC get its power? Second, the process that the EEOC engages in with an employer is known as “conciliation.” Research that term and in your own words describe what happens during conciliation. Finally, no person may sue under Title VII unless the EEOC first gives them a “right to sue letter.” How does that process work? Are there any important deadlines associated with a right to sue letter?
Sometimes an employer argues that its treatment of an applicant or employee is not discrimination, but merely compliance with a “facially neutral” employment policy. Research that term and tell me in your own words, what a “facially neutral” employment policy is (it has nothing to do with a person’s face). Find a case where a court discussed a “facially neutral” policy and tell me what occurred in that case.