After analyzing Ben Smith’s case, we came to a conclusion that there are enough evidence for Ben Smith to present his case to the court for discrimination allegation. Based on the information provided in the case study there are enough evidence to the favor of Ben Smith that it is highly possible that he will win the case if it is brought to the court’s attention.
The law that is protecting Ben Smith in this case is Title VII of the CRA 1964, which prohibits employers from discrimination or segregation on the bases of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, in any employment condition including hiring, firing, promotion, transfer, compensation and admission to training programs.
Ben Smith is protected by Title VII because he has been discriminated base on his sex “Image” as it is stated in the facts. Based on the information given in the case study, it is safe to assume that Louis Lane Cosmetics Company is only interested in hiring women for this particular position. Hence, men are being discriminated and excluded from the chance of being equally considered for this position on the bases of education and prior job experience.
Ben Smith will file his claim under disparate treatment. This is a type of discrimination in which differing treatment of individuals occurs, where the differences are based on individual's’ race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability status. In other words, an individual cannot be held to different standards when being considered for a hiring, promotion, training, transfer, compensation. In this case, a man should have the same opportunity as a women to work as a secretary in a cosmetic company such as Lois Lance Co. regardless of sex, physical image and looks.
We believe that there is a prima facie case of discrimination that shows Ben Smith was treated differently. The appropriate test in this case used to prove prima facie is the McDonnell-Douglas Test.
In order to prove prima facie, four conditions must be...