First Name Last Name
Plaza College
MGT1003 Section 8 – Supervisory Management
Professor Aicha Cesar
Spring 2022
- Do you believe that Joe Trosh has the right to carry a concealed weapon in the hospital due to being harassed for visiting casinos?
Part IA: The Purpose of the Report and the Problem
The purpose of the report is to solve the problem of whether or not Joe Trosh has the right to carry a concealed weapon in the hospital as a reason for self-defense against discrimination and harassment from the staff of a rural hospital in Oklahoma. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, harassment is a form of employment that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Age Discrimination Employment Act of 1967, and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,” n.d.).
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission outlined that “harassment’’ based on race/color discrimination means unwelcome conduct that is based on color, religious background, sex, national origin, older age, disability, or genetic information that is based on medical history (“U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,” n.d.).
Hirsch (2018) stated that the impact of discrimination on racism often creates challenges that the human resource manager is responsible for overcoming. In a workplace, racism is evident through macroaggression, defined as indirect, subtle, and unintentional acts of discrimination against marginalized groups.
Harassment based on stereotypes can affect an organization’s decision-making process in many ways, such as making a quick judgment without looking at the consequences. It also makes people feel preconceptions about a specific group of people leading to harsh treatment.in addition, harassment of stereotypes leads to fixed beliefs about the place of women and men in society.
Managers need to know about the Second Amendment right to bear arms and U.S. Supreme Court Cases that examine this issue because it will protect the hospital from legal matters (“Cornell Law School,” n.d.). The District of Columbia v. Heller case in which the supreme court held in 2008 on the second Amendment regarding firearm possession. It gives one the right to possess firearms, independent of service in state militia use the guns for self-defense.
A potential legal issue the Supervisor must consider is how to handle discipline decisions that involve employees who have experienced discrimination through harassment by co-workers. According to the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, it is “not right for a person to identify themselves as a licensed handgun or as lawfully in possession of any other firemen if the law does not demand information.”
Part 1B The Research Experience
To perform my research, I began with online research. I used Google and searched for articles rights of carrying weapons to work as a form of self-defense and discrimination and harassment in the place of work.
I have found five sources that helped complete my report. The article, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, explains that there should be no discrimination based on color, religion, sex, and national origin (BISHOP et al. 2021). The article, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, is helpful for Part II and Part III of my report because it is a certified representative of employees under the National Labor Relations Act or the Railway Labour Act.
The Cornell Law School websites provide information on the second Amendment of the United States, which states that a well-regulated Militia shall not be violated even if it is necessary to provide security to a free state. People should have the right to own and use arms (Devendorf,2020). This resource will be helpful for Part IV when I’m making my personal perspective.
I also found it helpful to read the OKLAHOMA SELF-DEFENSE ACT (Bledsoe,2022). The Act states that a citizen has a right to keep and carry arms for self-defense, but people will not prevent the Legislature from regulating the bearing of arms.
My last resource is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This website explains the legal issues of enacting federal laws forbidding workplace discrimination and outlines laws prohibiting discrimination.
Part II: Relevant Research Pertinent to Solving the Problem (one to two pages)
Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964 is an act that protects a person against discrimination based on race and color, national origin, or even religion in the workplace. The Act also prohibits decisions by employees based on stereotypes and assumptions.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces the Title Civil Rights Act of 1964. It also covers the employment agencies, local government, companies with 15 or more employees, and apprenticeship programs. Its primary goal is to define workplace protection and change unsuitable policies and practices.
QUESTION 3: Does Joe Trosh have a possible claim of workplace discrimination?
According to Joe Trosh, he had been harassed by co-workers for having an addiction to gambling at the casino. He claimed that his co-workers made jokes by referring to him as a native American who enjoyed going to the casino and gambling, forcing him to carry a weapon for self-defense.
The second Amendment of the United States Constitution states that a well-regulated Militia shall not be violated even if it is necessary for the security of a free state and to give the right to own weapons (“Cornell Law School,” n.d.). This statement has brought a debate on the Amendment’s intended scope. Therefore, the United States Constitution prohibits legal bodies from restricting the possession of firearms.
The U.S. Supreme Court subjects statutes and ordinances to three levels of scrutiny depending on the issue being handled. The scrutiny includes strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, and a rational basis (“SCOTUSblog – Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court,” 2022). Nevertheless, circuit courts suggest that U.S. Supreme Court is willing to uphold regulations on possessing handguns. The rules include prohibiting possession of a firearm, prohibiting weapons on government property, and requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
Joe Trosh is right when he states that he has a right to carry a concealed weapon. In the court ruling in 2008, the second Amendment guaranteed a personal right to carry a gun for self-defense, at least in the home District of Columbia versus Heller. Two years later, the court extended that right to other states through the fourteenth Amendment. Since then, every person has had a right to carry a handgun to protect themselves.
Oklahoma Defense Act provides guidelines on where not to carry concealed weapons on the excluded properties (Self Defense Act application trends in Oklahoma, 2005-2009, 2010). The properties excluded include a portion of public property structure or building during an event authorized by the state controlling such facilities, any public property field, fairgrounds, and a bit of public property leased to a business. The Act does not forbid one from carrying a weapon from properties that do not have signs prohibiting carrying firearms; hence, Joe had the right to take his gun to the hospital.
Part III: Potential Solutions (two pages)
Assumption #1: I assumed that the hospital has a written policy prohibiting the possession of weapons on company property
To prohibit workers from carrying weapons, the hospital should ensure the written policies are enforced to prohibit possessing weapons in the company. One solution is that a company should have the right to search its workers at the entry area to determine whether they contain any weapons. The weapon-free workplace policy should also ensure that the workplace is safe from violence for all workers. Therefore, this policy will enable the employees not to carry weapons violating the company’s guidelines.
Another solution is ensuring the human resource manager enforces the written policies for the workers. In this case, the human resource manager should be readily available in case of questions regarding the procedure. This solution will play a vital role in informing workers about the policy of prohibition of weapons on the premises. When workers are well informed, they prevent violation of the policy.
Assumption 2: I assumed the hospital does not have a written policy prohibiting possession of weapons regardless of whether it is a government or private entity
The hospital should ensure that they write policies that prohibit workers from bearing weapons regardless of whether the company is private or public. Having a policy will make it easier for the company to avoid violence.
Another solution is providing education training. The training should be in the form of a program that educates each worker on the policy and ensure they understand the importance of following a procedure.
Assumption 3: I assumed the hospital is a private entity and, therefore, its policies supersede the Okla. Def. Act
Assumption 4: I assumed the hospital is a government owned entity and does not have a written policy for prohibiting weapons
Assumption #2: I assumed that the hospital has a written policy prohibiting harassment based on discrimination
Adopting an online reporting system for employees to express themselves is a solution to harassment (Priest et al., 2020). This solution will enable the company to handle harassment issues and monitor the workplace. Hence, the complaints of employees should be taken seriously
by the government.
The human resource manager/should collect all the complaint information and ensure follow-up communication with the workers. It is an employer’s responsibility to prevent any workplace discrimination.
Assumption: I assumed the hospital does not have a written policy prohibiting harassment based on discrimination
Training workers is a suitable solution (Sinkler & von Peter 2019). These training programs teach employees what harassment is and explain to workers that they have a right to a workplace free of harassment based on their color, race or origin.
On the other hand, supervisors and managers like the HR should be trained by the company separately from the employees. These programs will enable the managers and supervisors to deal with workplace discrimination issues.
Assumption: I assumed the hospital trains its employees and staff harassment based on discrimination
The management should ensure that each employee attends the training sessions without failure. Consistent attendance will ensure employees know they have a right to free harassment and understand different kinds of harassment.
Ensuring workers know the procedure for addressing complaints is also essential. These procedures are well stated by the trainees, who are the managers and employees.
Assumption: I assumed the hospital provides compliance training for all its employees
The hospital should ensure employees are trained on procedures for addressing complaints.
(Jalali et al. 2020). The training contains policies explaining what harassment is, the investigation made by the employee on harassment, and a straightforward procedure for addressing complaints.
Another solution is to make employees understand that there are no uncertain terms that state they will not tolerate harassment from other workers. This solution will enable a company to reduce complaints of harassment among workers.
Part IV: Your Personal Perspective – Your Recommendation (one to two pages)
Why is it the best solution?
The best solution is to provide training to employees. Exercise plays a vital role in reducing the risks of harassment. It also educates employees on what harassment is, which enables them to file a complaint to the management in case of an occurrence. Moreover, training should emphasize discouraging the harassment of workers and ensure workers feel secure in the workplace. Hence, training should include ways to identify harassment, how to respond to harassment, how to report and what protection a company provides to its workers in case of harassment.
Training is regarded as the best solution since it eliminates harassment like bullying, discrimination, and unpleasant behaviors and prevents them from occurring. It helps workers avoid going against the law or paying fines to the harassed worker (Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2020).
Are there any disadvantages to this solution?
Training employees has disadvantages because most employers conduct the training to please their bosses. Training sessions meet the company’s requirements but fail to solve problems employees face. The managers tend to teach what is demanded of them by the company.
Another disadvantage is employees do not take the training sessions seriously (Bondestam & Lundqvist 2020). This lack of seriousness is because the training does not help employees to understand the damage of harassment in the form of discrimination. In addition, the movement fails to prevent potential harassers from taking part in harassing their co-workers.
Some suggest that training on harassment is insufficient for business since the lack of emphasis that Title VII is the driving force of inclusion and equal employment. The company’s focus has inadequate training that uses prominent examples and exaggerated forms of harassment. They fail to use real examples that are relatable to the workers.
Part V: Consequences of Your Personal Perspective and Conclusion (one to two pages)
What are the possible consequences of your recommendations?
Offering training helps workers to understand that they are part of the company and are ready to work and bring growth. Training comforts employees that any harassment is reportable and helps the complainant know who to approach.
Sensitizing workers’ behaviors that other members call threatening(Nielsen,2017). It is done by managers who ensure other workers understand behavior is not threatening. Harassment can be damaging to the victims and other workers, and it can lead to mental and health damages.
Trainees will share a set of behaviors that the company terms harassment. Employees will be able to record any harassment as stated by the company.
The company will inform workers about the federal, state, and local protections against harassment and how they can approach them in case of an issue.
Good training develops a sense of responsibility among workers and managers. It creates a workplace that is free from harassment. It also helps the workers respect other workers regardless of race, religion, or origin.
After researching and considering the consequences, does this impact your personal perspective?
Training has a significant impact on workers. It changes employee attitudes toward co-workers (Roehling & Huang 2018). It also helps employees to feel secure in their place of work; hence it helps in understanding the importance of a harassment-free workplace.
Harassment training advises employees on how to act in case of an outcome and ensures that they react to any harassment by reporting the incident. This training will result in increased productivity and profits for the company.
Unfortunately, not all employees report harassment cases when they occur. The reason is that many workers are unaware if they can report the incident to the company. Some fear that they will be demoted and given undesirable shifts if they say. At the same time, others fear that they will be suspended from work or that employers might downgrade their contracts.
References
|
Nielsen, M. B. D., Kjær, S., Aldrich, P. T., Madsen, I. E., Friborg, M. K., Rugulies, R., & Folker, A. P. (2017). Sexual harassment in care work–Dilemmas and consequences: A qualitative investigation. International journal of nursing studies, 70, 122-130. Roehling, M. V., & Huang, J. (2018). Sexual harassment training effectiveness: An interdisciplinary review and call for research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(2), 134-150.
|
|
| BISHOP, E. B. J., D’ARPINO, E. M. M. A., Garcia-Bou, G., Henderson, K., Rebel, S., Renda, E., … & Wind, N. (2021). SEX DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS UNDER TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964. Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, 22, 369. | |
Bledsoe, A. (2022). Neither ground on which to stand, nor self to defend: The structural denial (and radical histories) of Black self-defense. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 112(5), 1296-1312.
Devendorf, L. (2020). Second-Class Citizens Under the Second Amendment: the Case for Applying Strict Scrutiny to Lifetime Firearm Bans for Individuals Previously Committed to Mental Institutions. Cornell L. Rev., 106, 501.
SCOTUSblog – Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court. (2022). Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.scotusblog.com/
Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, Information Services Division, Data Collection, and Reporting Section. (2010). Self Defense Act application trends in Oklahoma, 2005-2009. Oklahoma City.
Jalali, M. S., Bruckes, M., Westmattelmann, D., & Schewe, G. (2020). Why employees (still) click on phishing links: investigation in hospitals. Journal of medical Internet research, 22(1), e16775.
Priest, K. C., Englander, H., & McCarty, D. (2020). “Now hospital leaders are paying attention”: a qualitative study of internal and external factors influencing addiction consult services. Journal of substance abuse treatment, 110, 59-65.
Zinkler, M., & von Peter, S. (2019). End coercion in mental health services—toward a system based on support only. Laws, 8(3), 19.
Bondestam, F., & Lundqvist, M. (2020). Sexual harassment in higher education–a systematic review. European Journal of Higher Education, 10(4), 397-419.
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2020). Why sexual harassment programs backfire. Harvard Business Review, 98(3), 45-52.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.eeoc.gov/racecolor-discrimination.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.eeoc.gov/harassmen
Cornell Law School. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment]
Cornell Law School. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment]
