Civil Rights Issues in Employment

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

According to Title IX, discrimination of employees because of sex, or exclusion of employees from participation in any activity, or gaining benefits in the United States of America, is prohibited (“Title IX and Sex Discrimination” par. 2). If any employer does this, it is considered a discriminatory act. In Peach State College, there were two assistant ADs, Martha and Bob. Due to the college’s cost-cutting measures, Martha’s employment was terminated. The employers were not aware of any health issues ailing Martha during the process of layoff. However, Martha was diagnosed with diabetes but she made no official announcement of her disease. Only a few colleagues knew about it. It can be assumed that her health status was unknown to the authorities. Nevertheless, the authorities were concerned that Martha may contest her termination as a form of discrimination based on sex according to Title IX of the Civil Rights Act and Title II of the disability discrimination based on her medical condition (“Title II of the Civil Rights Act” par. 1).

Sex discrimination can be argued by Martha, as her job was terminated while Bob’s was not. In this case, the discrimination based on sex is applicable as the termination of Martha’s job even though it was based on a cost-cutting measure undertaken by the institute. Diabetes is considered an ADA according to the federal regulations and Martha may put up an argument contesting her termination (“Questions & Answers about Diabetes in the Workplace and the Americans with Disabilities Act” par. 4). However, because Martha has not notified the institution officially of her diabetes, the act of termination cannot be proven as discrimination because the authorities were not aware of it. Further, the institute cannot ask Martha to provide information regarding her medical condition because it is against the law to request information regarding employees’ medical health until it is voluntarily disclosed (“The ADA: Your Employment Rights as an Individual With a Disability” par. 6).

Discussion

Freedom of academic expression and speech has been the cornerstone of American university learning. Freedom of expression and speech allows intelligent minds to express their thoughts without inhibitions and prohibitions (Haag 519). Dr. Knightly, who is an acclaimed educationist and scholar, has become disillusioned with the new administration and has publicly denounced the incumbent president. As a new scholar on the issue, I would be concerned regarding the extent of protection that this freedom of expression may give to educationists. Freedom of expression of speech in public or private institutions should be the same, though in the latter case, the employees may have to abide by certain institutional regulations (Rorty 57). However, freedom of self-expression to demonstrate the incapability of the management openly may be covered under freedom of expression. Though this can amount to defamation, however, cannot be safeguarded under the freedom of academic speech and expression. The freedom that universities give to the educationists under this freedom is limited to the expression of ideas and knowledge related to academic research, teaching, and academic writing. However, in the case of Dr. Knightley’s disillusionment with the new management, he has been expressing a personal opinion, unrelated to his academic career. Therefore, in this case, the freedom of expression and speech of academicians cannot be safeguarded under the act.

In terms of new rules and lawmaking regarding the academician’s freedom of speech and expression, it should be stipulated to academic research, study, and teaching and should be extending to slandering of individuals or institutions based on personal opinion. Therefore, the law will safeguard the freedom of expression as well as ensure a limit to the law, which will also safeguard the interest of the institutions. Academic freedom is important for the generation of new ideas, however, this cannot extend to personal agendas.