Your Ally In
Workplace Justice

  1. Home
  2.  » 
  3. Workplace Discrimination
  4.  » Employers trying to sidestep federal regulations

Employers trying to sidestep federal regulations

On Behalf of | Aug 23, 2023 | Workplace Discrimination

In spite of countless advancements and laws codified to protect workers from discrimination, employers still find ways to sidestep the rules creatively. They seemingly find new ways to mistreat and wrongfully terminate workers for reasons unrelated to their on-the-job performance.

This sub-standard treatment of employees can devolve into discrimination that can take many forms and include:

  • Age
  • Disability
  • Gender
  • Orientation
  • Religion
  • Race

Strict adherence to federal regulations

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has clear rules, particularly when it comes to federal agencies engaged in discriminatory practices. Workers who suspect potential discrimination in any form should take proactive steps and file a complaint without worrying about retaliation. Once an investigation begins, they should actively participate in the EEO complaint process.

Multiple acts exist to protect applicants and employees that include:

  • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
  • Equal Pay Act of 1963
  • Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
  • Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  • The Civil Rights Act of 1991

Much-needed protections

Retaliation can occur when an employee or applicant reports evidence of wrongdoing, also known as “whistleblowing.” Stepping up to testify, helping someone exercise their rights to cooperate in an investigation, or refusing an order violating laws should be rewarded.

On far too many occasions, those actions result in employers retaliating against prospective or current employees who are just looking to do the right thing.

Despite changing views and stricter laws, many employers continue to marginalize those seeking jobs and those holding essential positions who try to hold them accountable for breaking longstanding rules. The “risk versus reward” scenario should lean more towards the reward, whether it involves satisfaction over securing justice or monetary compensation.