The Inter-Pacific Railroad employs Francisco McGregor, a Hispanic man, as a supervisory conductor on its commuter trains. Except for one white woman, all of the other supervisory conductors employed by Inter-Pacific were black men. Francisco's Spanish nickname is "Paco." The other supervisor conductors referred to Francisco as "Taco." They used racial slurs, such as "beanbag," when talking about him to other employees. Francisco complained to the senior trainmaster and threatened to file a claim with EEOC. What would you suggest the trainmaster do to address Francisco's concerns and prevent him from filing a claim with the EEOC?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 9:04 am ad1c9bdddf
To recap the basic facts:
The supervisor conductors refer to the employee as "taco" and make racial slurs against the same employee. The employee has found the slurs offensive as witnessed by his actions, which include a complaint to the senior train master. The employee (Francisco) is threatening that he will file a claim with the EEOC. What should the train master do in this situation?
The train master needs to immediately end the racial slurs and the use of the offensive ...
This solution explains the legal action that needs to be taken by Inter-Pacific Railroad. The appropriate legal elements involved are discussed.
Joe's Bakery advertised in the local newspaper for an assistant baker. Muhammad, a recent honors graduate of the Culinary School of America, applied for the position and was told that the position had been filled. Muhammad is of Middle-Eastern descent and practices the Muslim faith. The following day, and for nine consecutive days thereafter, Muhammad saw the ad in the paper again. Joe's Bakery employs seven people, including Joe. Do the facts satisfy the requirements for a prima facie case? If so, can Muhammad pursue a claim for discrimination against Joe's Bakery?View Full Posting Details