TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 When Rinson did no

TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 When Rinson did not receive the promotion he believed was his, he became upset. Rinson believes he did not receive the raise because his boss hates him and always judges Rinson\'s work harshly. If Rinson can prove this is true, does he have a valid claim for damages under Title VII? Why or why not?

Solution

First let’s refresh the concept of the Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964:

“It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer … to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”

Title VII forbids discrimination in any aspect of employment, including hiring and firing, compensation, assignment, or classification of employees, transfer, promotion, layoff, or recall, job advertisements, recruitment, testing, use of company facilities, training and apprenticeship programs, fringe benefits, pay, retirement plans, and disability leave, and other terms and conditions of employment.

If Rinson believes he has a Title VII claim, he has the right to file a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the federal agency charged with enforcing many anti-discrimination laws. In most cases the employee has 180 days from the date of the discriminatory activity to file a discrimination charge with the EEOC in order to preserve his rights. He doesn’t need an attorney to file a complaint with the EEOC.

If he doesn’t belong to any protected group (black people, people with disabilities, women, a particular religion, inmigrants, etc) it is almost impossible to prove that there is a case of discrimination, at least not according to the Title VII, since this title protects people belonging to these groups.

If Rinson isn’t sure about filing an EEOC charge, he can take the following steps: