Case Study 1
Religious Discrimination and Racial Harassment: What Ever Happened to MarShawn DeMur?
January 17, 2015
Case Discussion Questions
1. Identify and describe the specific issues Maalick encountered in the workplace. Do the actions of other workers at Treton represent discrimination and harassment? What elements of law are important for Treton to consider? Maalick encountered religious discrimination on several occasions while at work. The first instance was when he requested vacation for a religious event and his manager was reluctant to grant the request because of his religious beliefs. According to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 employers are required to “reasonably accommodate the …show more content…
By allowing other employees to play jokes on Maalick he is encouraging bad behavior and putting his own liability as well as that of the company at risk. His lack of good decision making places his management abilities as well as his ethics in question. Jenkins touts himself as being a religious man however his behavior doesn’t reflect that. The bible teaches us that we should not judge others rather we should love them with the same standard that Jesus loves us. This is concisely articulated in Galations 3:28 where it clearly states that all of us are the same with Jesus. Clive Jenkins should have been an example for professionalism to his employees.
4. What resolution to this situation might Judith Dixon suggest? Judith Dixon may suggest that all employees complete a diversity training program. According to Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy (2012) “diversity training programs teach supervisors and managers how to manage and motivate a diverse workforce and employees are taught how to recognize and respond to situations in the workplace” (p. 148). Dixon may suggest development of programs that will encourage a culture of respect among employees. According to Deadrick, McAfee & Champagne (1996) “a “cultural” approach to dealing with harassment in the workplace would concentrate on getting employees to view the adoption of anti‐harassment, or mutual respect, goals and procedures as a choice made by them