See attached file.
Refer to Wal-Mart's Discrimination case and answer the questions provided in essay format:
1. According to this case, which employment laws has Walmart been accused of violating? I say the Title VII of the CRA of 1964.
2. How might it have avoided those charges?
3. Which challenge do you think will be more difficult for Wal-Mart: diversifying its top management ranks or ending charges of discrimination? Why?
4. Do you think more diversity among its executives would help Walmart avoid problems with discrimination? If so, how? If not, why not?
Please refer to the attached file for the response.
Employment laws Walmart has been accused of violating
Based on the case, what the company has been accused of violating is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that states that employment discrimination on the basis of one's race, religion, sex, national origin and colour is illegal. This law protects employees of a company as well as job applicants. All companies with 15 or more employees are required to adhere to the rules set forth by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The law also established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which continues to enforce this and other laws that protect people against employment discrimination.
In relation to the case at hand, the law states that an employer can't make hiring decisions based on an applicant's colour, race, religion, sex or national origin. An employer can't discriminate based on these factors when recruiting job candidates, ...
The expert analyzes Wal-Mart's discrimination case study.