We’ve all had that feeling we’ve rubbed someone the wrong way. This is a feeling that starts in our gut; it is our subjective understanding of the circumstances. Next, we try to objectively examine the way we are being treated relative to the treatment of others around us. We ask, is it me or are people of a different race being treated differently? This analysis is the same one demanded by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) in racial discrimination cases.
Racial discrimination is often manifested subtly and is difficult to detect. It can also be extremely difficult to prove. However, one thing is certain, black Americans have faced discrimination in the workplace for the past 25 years. In fact, juries around the country are routinely awarding large sums of damages to African Americans who have demonstrated that they suffered racial discrimination in their respective workplaces.
To prove race discrimination in the workplace, an employee must be able to demonstrate that they were subjected to an adverse job action based on their race. Generally, an employee has to prove race discrimination using direct evidence. An example of direct evidence would include, among other requirements, a memorandum, email or audio recording expressly stating something to the effect of: “Demote Jane because she is black; we only promote employees who are not black”. However only in rare cases does an employee actually have direct evidence of discrimination. Therefore, courts have accepted circumstantial (also known as indirect) evidence of discrimination. Where there is a sufficient amount of indirect evidence, the court will accept the entire compilation of evidence as proof of discrimination. An example of circumstantial evidence of racial discrimination in the workplace could include, among other requirements, a scenario where all the demoted employees were black, and all the promoted employees were white; without reason.
In order to prevail in a race discrimination lawsuit, the employee must demonstrate that:
Proving a race discrimination case can be challenging. Additionally, there are strict timelines for reporting and filing racial discrimination claims.
If you feel you have been discriminated against retaining the professional services of an employment law attorney will prove beneficial to assist you.
Race in America is that ever-present white elephant in the room which creeps into every conversation and influences our most subconscious thoughts. Congress considered this fact when it enacted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) which does its best to keep racial biases out of the workplace by prohibiting employers from:
Although employers may inquire about race and affirmative action programs, they are prohibited from allowing race to be part of the decision-making process.
Furthermore, Title VII prohibits employee segregation that is based on race, it also prohibits assigning primarily minorities to certain positions or groups or to categorize employees or jobs so that certain jobs are generally held by minorities. Race or color is never a bona fide occupational qualification under Title VII.
Racial discrimination and employment policies must apply to everyone, regardless of race or color and Title VII prohibits race/color discrimination against all persons, including Caucasians. Although race and color overlap, they are different. While Title VII does not define “color,” the courts and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission read “color” to have its commonly understood meaning-pigmentation, complexion, or skin shade or tone. Racial discrimination involves treating someone unfavorably because he/she is of a certain race or because of personal characteristics associated with race (such as hair texture, skin color, or certain facial features). Color discrimination involves treating someone unfavorably because of skin color complexion.
Yes, we have all engaged in the discussion about race. Living in America makes this fact undeniable. It would serve us well to define the terms being used in order to use them properly. I hope the foregoing was helpful. – SEO
Generally the law gives employers broad rights to surveillance of their workplace, especially where company-owned devices are being used to communicate.
However, the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“ECPA”) provides civil and criminal penalties for violators who intercept electronic communications such as telephone, email, voicemail, among others. Even the “business purposes” exception in the ECPA does not absolve employers who are only permitted to monitor on business-related communications but must cease surveillance as soon as they are aware that the communication is personal. From the outset, employers in contravention of the ECPA would be liable for equitable damages; additionally, in the 11th Circuit (which includes Georgia) actual damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs are awardable at the Court’s discretion.
In a nutshell: don’t do it!
Employees have successfully relied on the federal Stored Communications Act (SCA) to make the argument that employers are liable for actual damages, statutory damages, equitable relief, punitive damages, and attorney fees resulting from unauthorized personal email access. The SCA provides these penalties for whoever is not the ISP or the intended user and engages in the following conduct:
(1) intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided; or
(2) intentionally exceeds an authorization to access that facility;
and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage in such system shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section.
