Disparate Treatment, Case Study #9
Joel B. Higley & George Patton
Staffing - HRM301-H1WW (F13)
Professor Carol Pitman
Lauren Hill v Brookhill Manufacturing Company
The following is about Case # 9 in Exercise 17. (Nkomo 2011). According to Nkomo 2011, “Lauren Hill” was a worker in a plant for Brookhill Manufacturing Company. She claims she is a victim of Sex Discrimination. Mrs. Hill claims she has evidence of Sex Pay Discrimination. Therefore, six months before she retires, she submitted and filed a formal EEOC charge, because of time of retirement she was being paid significantly less than any of her male colleagues. In addition, she said she has evidence that several supervisors had given her poor evaluations because of her sex.
What legal statute(s) apply in this case?
The legal statue that applies to this case is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Equal Pay Act (Heneman, 2012).
What issues must the court decide in this case?
The court must decide in this case if there was any discrimination involved with Sex Discrimination through the Equal Pay Act.
If you were the judge, how would you rule?
If I were the judge, I would have Mrs. Hill present evident of the discrimination and I would view the company’s polices on evaluations and job performance on Lauren Hill. I would also look at standards for determining rate of pay. The rate of pay must be equal for persons performing equal work on jobs requiring equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and performed under similar working conditions. When factors such as seniority, education, or experience are used to determine the rate of pay, then those standards must be applied on a sex neutral basis. Then I would decide on the case (Code, 2012). If there were sex discrimination, I would rule in favor of Lauren Hill and compensate accordingly.
Code of Federal Regulations (2012).Part 1620- The Equal Pay Act. Retrived from:...