Employment Law Legal Risk and Thesis

Paula states that the rationale for the refusal is also violation of Title IIV and EEOC (Equal Opportunity Commission Policy) as it is based merely on the fact that she is a woman and has the potential to become pregnant. Sam's use of his power is also a continuation of his harassment, and now seems explicitly 'quid pro quo.' Not accepting his advances resulted in a negative impact upon Paula's job.

Paula is correct and Sam is incorrect, legally speaking. While fetal protection policies that barred women of childbearing age from jobs because of harm to their potential fetuses became widespread in 1970s and 1980s, the 1991 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in UAW v. Johnson Controls declared these laws to be a form of sexual discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Fetal rights, 2009, Law Library).

Scenario 3:

NewCorp has a strong case that the nature of Paul's employment requires him to work in confined spaces and they are not in violation of his rights. Given that this is an essential aspect of Paul's work, and NewCorp has made reasonable accommodations to give him more space, they are not in violation of the American Disabilities Act, if Paul tries to claim that his claustrophobia is a disability. It is not a violation of the ADA to not hire someone with a disability if the disability interferes with critical aspects of the job.

Paul might have a case that the original location of the machine was dangerous, given that one employee was injured in the old location. If the employee was operating the machine correctly, yet was still injured, Paul could claim that NewCorp was careless regarding worker safety, although the current location has been judged safe by NewCorp inspectors. If the original location was also judged safe, Paul might be reasonably mistrustful of these company inspectors and ask for OSHA to review the safety of the new set-up.

Under OSHA laws, workers have the right to ask employers to correct or remove hazards "even if they are not violations of specific OSHA standards" (Worker rights, 2009, OSHA). Paul is within his rights to call OSHA as a worker may: "File a discrimination complaint (under Section 11(c) of the OSH Act) within 30 days" if the worker is "punished or discriminated against for exercising…safety and health rights or for refusing to work (not guaranteed by the OSH Act) when faced with an imminent danger of death or serious injury and there is insufficient time for OSHA to inspect" (Worker rights, 2009, OSHA). However, if no one else other than Paul finds the current location to be hazardous, his main recourse may be to claim that the original setup was dangerous, improperly inspected, and this caused him psychological trauma (his claustrophobia) because he heard about the other worker's accident.

References

Consumer Law: What is a contract? (2009). Paralegal Advice. Retrieved January 10, 2009 at http://www.paralegaladvice.org.za/docs/chap11/02.html

Employment at will. (2009). Nolo. Retrieved January 10, 2009 at http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/article-30022.html

Fetal rights. (2009). Law Library. Retrieved January 10, 2009 at http://law.jrank.org/pages/6853/Fetal-Rights-Fetal-Protection-Policies.html

Worker rights. (2009). Retrieved January 10, 2009 at OSHA. http://www.osha.gov/as/opa/worker/rights.html