Gender Discrimination In The Workforce

Should an employer discriminate against women in the work force? “Business and economics” In some circumstances a woman’s role is primarily of being the wife and mother, however a woman seeks to take on a lot of responsibilities at work to prove that she can be as dominant as a male. Although improvements have been made there is still no gender equality in a workplace between a male and female. The workforce is still bias between males and females, unfortunately women are still not being treated equally in a workplace. The numerous obstacles women face in their career is gender discrimination. Even though women are qualified in the workforce, they still have to work harder …show more content…
The growth of women in the workplace has taken action to protect women, during their pregnancy. However, some laws are now forcing to represent the rights of pregnant women within the workplace to have equality. It is unfair to take away credit to those that have worked very hard during their previous years because of maternity leave. The Family and Medical Leave Act 1993,shows the studies through Salihu, Myers, and August of guaranteeing the rights of pregnant workers within in 12 weeks of unpaid leave for carrying a child without punishment of losing their job. (Salihu, Myers, and August 88-89). This Act help to protect women that are pregnant to not be discriminated in a workplace. The financial laws are provided with additional legal protection for pregnant women. The Employment Insurance Act of 1996, Salihu, Myers, and August reveals the federal government of Canada allows women up to 15 weeks of paid leave at 55% of their standard pay for pregnancy …show more content…
The court claims willingness of verbal and physical conduct of sexual orientation, claims in situations to increase the chances to prevail, employers should focus on the aspects of appearance in the workplace. Appearances are majority based on discrimination according to Malos research there are two types: based on the employer, such as dress code and grooming requirements on the job (95). The rules contain treatment based on sex that is discriminatory to be justified under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Kelley V. Johnson 1976; Philips v. Martin Marietta Corp. 1971 of qualification acts stop the issues about discrimination against women in a workplace (98). The complaint is filled with potential of the employer is the liability. Malo suggest harassment or discrimination that is done on the job of due to physical appearance by wearing short dresses, skirts, and wearing make-up leads to discrimination (97-98). Women should not be discriminated or harassed for dressing sexy in a place of employment. The dress code implies women to dress in a more fashionable manner in some cases the appearance should not be judge instead it should be based on