Question 1

In King v.Township of East Lampeter,the court found that the Amish are a distinct racial group and have a separate ethnic identity beyond religious observance.Thus they were protected under section 1981.

Accepted Answer

In King v. Township of East Lampeter, the plaintiffs sought section 1981 protection on the basis of their "Amish ethnic culture." The court denied the plaintiffs protection on this basis, distinguishing a New York case that found Orthodox Jews were indeed protected under section 1981. The court in King found that Jews are a distinct race for civil rights purposes but did not find the Amish to be a similarly distinct racial group and, without evidence that they have an independent, separate ethnic identity beyond religious observance, they were not protected under section 1981.

Question 2

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)allows discrimination in favor of U.S.Citizens (as opposed to non-U.S.Citizens legally residing in the U.S.)but only so long as the employer can demonstrate that citizenship is a BFOQ.

Accepted Answer

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), in contrast to Title VII, does prohibit employers in certain circumstances from discriminating against employees on the basis of their citizenship or intended citizenship. However, the IRCA makes it illegal for employers to knowingly hire those not legally authorized for employment in the United States. The IRCA also allows discrimination in favor of U.S. citizens as against legal "aliens" (non-US citizens legally residing in the United States). While these individuals are guaranteed various rights pursuant to the Constitution, the law confers certain benefits only to those who are citizens and not to those who are legal residents but non-US citizens.

Question 3

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)is charged with combating civil rights violations against Arab,Sikh,and South-Asian Americans,as well as those who are perceived to be members of those groups.

Accepted Answer

The U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) is charged with combating civil rights violations against Arab, Sikh, and South-Asian Americans, as well as those who are perceived to be members of those groups. The group is battling these crimes and acts of discrimination by identifying cases involving bias crimes, conducting outreach, and working with other DoJ offices.

Question 4

Petri,who runs a Basque restaurant,wants his diners to have an authentic culinary experience.Thus,he wants to recruit qualified individuals of Basque origin for his restaurant.Petri can avoid a claim of national origin discrimination and still limit the job to individuals of Basque origin by showing that:

Accepted Answer

Petri can avoid a claim of national origin discrimination and still limit the job to individuals of Basque origin by showing that an applicant's ability to speak fluent Basque and understand Basque cuisine are bona fide occupational qualifications. An employer may show that national origin is actually a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) for a job. That is, an employer may explain why a specific national origin is necessary for the position applied for, why it is a legitimate job requirement that is reasonably necessary for the employer's particular business.

Question 5

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)requires that a court find an employer liable for national origin harassment even if most would say that the conduct is not offensive and the individual involved is just overly sensitive.

Accepted Answer

In considering employer liability, the court will look to whether the conduct was physically threatening or intimidating, its severity, pervasiveness throughout the working environment, whether a reasonable person would find the conduct offensive and/or hostile, and how the employer responded.

Question 6

Magda comes to work in clothes that are highly reflective of her national origin.This happens to violate the dress code of her workplace.After being politely asked to follow the office dress code several times by her supervisor,Magda is finally asked to return home and change into clothing that conforms to the company's dress code.Which of the following holds true if Magda decides to file a discrimination claim based on national origin?

Accepted Answer

Magda's employer can defend the dress code because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not require an employer to accommodate an employee's attire of national origin. No accommodation of one's national origin is required of employers. While an employer would be required to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious attire, there is no similar responsibility to accommodate an employee's attire of national origin, unless it can be shown to overlap with his or her religion.

Question 7

In the case of Garcia v.Spun Steak Co.,the court followed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC)guidelines and held that the English-only rule in the workplace violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Accepted Answer

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) takes the position that English-only rules applied at all times or only applied to certain foreign speakers are presumptively discriminatory, although the courts have not always agreed with that approach. In the case of Garcia v. Spun Steak Co., the court rejected the argument that the policy was discriminatory because it denied Spanish-speaking employees the ability to express their cultural heritage, denied them a privilege of employment enjoyed by speakers of English as a first language, and created an atmosphere of inferiority and intimidation. The court stated that "Title VII is not meant to protect against rules that merely inconvenience some employees, even if the inconvenience falls regularly on a protected class."

Question 8

Amiri,who belongs to the Maori tribe,aspires to be a deputy sheriff in Upper Elm County.Amiri sports a small moko tattoo across his cheeks and nose as a symbol of his heritage.Per the dress code,however,sheriffs are not allowed to have any visible tattoos.Amiri is told that he will need to remove his tattoo before he can apply to be a deputy sheriff.Which of the following will hold true in this scenario?

Accepted Answer

Upper Elm County can defend itself against Amiri's claim because a dress code is permissible under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While an employer would be required to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious attire, there is no similar responsibility to accommodate an employee's attire of national origin unless it can be shown to overlap with his or her religion.

Question 9

Jingfei,an employee of Chinese origin,works as a sales representative at Global Recyclers International.Her supervisor,Ralph,persistently refers to her as "Julie" instead of "Jingfei." Although she objects and asks to be called by her rightful name,Ralph continues to call her "Julie" for over a year and justifies his actions by saying that an American-sounding name would increase her chances of success and would be more acceptable to Global's clientele.Jingfei brings a complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.Which of the following holds true in this case?

Accepted Answer

Global Recyclers International will be liable to Jingfei because ethnic characteristics go beyond skin color and other physical traits and can include names. In addition to national origin encompassing an employee's place of birth, it also includes ethnic characteristics or origins, as well as physical, linguistic, or cultural traits closely associated with a national origin group. It also may serve as the basis for a national origin discrimination claim if an employee has a surname that is generally associated with a national origin group.

Question 10

Criminal penalties can be imposed for violations of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).

Accepted Answer

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) established civil and criminal penalties for hiring illegal aliens. Generally, fines are not imposed for paperwork violations alone or for employment of aliens whose illegal status was unknown, unless employers refused to comply or other egregious factors existed.

Question 11

To successfully claim discrimination based on national origin,an employee must demonstrate all of the following except:

Accepted Answer

An employee may successfully claim discrimination on the basis of national origin if it is shown that: 1) She or he is a member of a protected class (i.e., articulate the employee's national origin); 2) She or he was qualified for the position for which she or he applied or in which she or he was employed; 3) The employer made an employment decision against this employee or applicant; and 4) The position was filled by someone who was not a member of the protected class.

Question 12

An employer may decide to not hire an applicant solely because they wear a headscarf or turban if there is a policy in place stating that employees may not wear hats,etc.at work.

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court held that a job applicant seeking to prove a Title VII disparate treatment claim need only show that the need for a religious accommodation was a motivating factor in the prospective employer's adverse decision. Employers also need to be sensitive to possible instances of ethnic harassment, especially that which may unfairly relate to security concerns. Finally, employers may not require individuals of one ethnic background to undergo more significant security checks or other preemployment requirements unless all applicants for that position are required to do so.

Question 13

An employer who enters into a contract with a government agency has an affirmative obligation to ensure that Asians are hired and retained without regard to their religion or national origin based on the Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion or National Origin.

Accepted Answer

Federal agencies or employers who enter into contracts with a government agency are required by the Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion or National Origin to ensure that individuals are hired and retained without regard to their religion or national origin. These guidelines impose on the federal contractor an affirmative obligation to prevent discrimination. The provisions include the following ethnic groups: Eastern, Middle, and Southern European ancestry, including Jews, Catholics, Italians, Greeks, and Slavs. However, Blacks, Spanish-surnamed Americans, Asians, and Native Americans are specifically excluded from the guidelines' coverage because of their protection elsewhere in Office of Federal Contract Compliance Rules.

Question 14

Nesbitt hires Francois,an alien working in the United States with the legal authority to do so.One month later,Francois loses his right to work in the United States.Which of the following holds true in this case?

Accepted Answer

Nesbitt's continued employment of Francois will constitute a violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) if Nesbitt knows that Francois is now an unauthorized alien. It is unlawful for a person or other entity, after hiring an alien for employment, to continue to employ the alien in the United States knowing the alien is (or had become) an unauthorized alien with respect to such employment.

Question 15

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)created a special classification,"Code Z," to designate complaints from undocumented workers regarding workplace abuses.

Accepted Answer

In the aftermath of September 11, hate crimes against individuals of Middle Eastern descent dramatically increased. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) created a special classification, "Code Z," to designate complaints of "backlash discrimination" from individuals who are-or are perceived to be-Muslim, Sikh, Arab, Middle Eastern, or South Asian.

Question 16

The discharge of a teacher from her services is upheld when,although fluent in English,she spoke with such a thick accent that her students found it difficult to follow her.

Accepted Answer

An employer is permitted to choose not to hire or promote an employee to a position that requires clear oral communication in English if the employee's accent substantially affects his or her ability to communicate clearly. For example, where a teacher was fluent in English but spoke with such a thick accent that her students had a difficult time understanding her, her discharge was upheld.

Question 17

Innocent or negligent discrimination is a defense to a claim of discrimination under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).

Accepted Answer

The main difference between a proof of discrimination under Title VII and IRCA is that, in proving a case of disparate impact, Title VII does not require proof of discriminatory intent, while IRCA requires that the adverse action be knowingly and intentionally discriminatory. Therefore, innocent or negligent discrimination is a complete defense to a claim of discrimination under IRCA.

Question 18

Citizenship and national origin are the same.

Accepted Answer

Title VII's prohibition against discrimination on the basis of national origin does not necessarily prohibit discrimination on the basis of citizenship; this only occurs where citizenship discrimination "has the purpose or effect" of national origin discrimination or where it is pretext for national origin discrimination. In fact, non-US citizens who are legally residing in and permitted to work in the United States) are often restricted from access to certain government or other positions by statute.

Question 19

National origin was included in Title VII's list of protected classes:

Accepted Answer

National origin was included in Title VII's list of protected classes to ensure that employers did not make employment decisions based on preconceived notions about employees' or applicants' country of origin. Note that section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, also may apply in those circumstances where national origin is a proxy for or equivalent to race (discussed later in this chapter).

Question 20

Melanie,a white female employed at The Office Corner for three months,is married to Muhammad,who is of Middle Eastern descent.Melanie has been subjected to verbal abuse almost every day ever since her co-workers became aware of her husband's ethnicity.She has been called a "traitor" and a "terrorist." Her co-workers refuse to work with her,and her supervisor condoned this behavior by assigning her tasks in the stockroom when previously,she assisted customers in the electronics department.Which of the following holds true in this scenario?

Accepted Answer

Melanie does have a claim for national origin discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because she is being harassed based on the national origin of her husband. It may serve as the basis for a national origin discrimination claim if an employee is identified with or connected to a person of a specific national origin, such as when someone suffers discrimination because he or she is married to a person of a certain ethnic heritage.

Quiz 7: National Origin Discrimination