Case Walmart's discrimination difficulties. Question 1-3
1. According to this case, which employment laws has Walmart been accused of violating? How might it have avoided those charges?
According to this case, Walmart been accused of violating Title VII of CRA that forbids discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Employers, for example Walmart can avoid discrimination by avoiding disparate treatment of job applicants and employees, as well as policies that result in disparate impact. Companies can develop and enforce an EEO policy coupled with policies and practices that demonstrate a high value placed on diversity. Affirmative action may correct past discrimination, but quota-based activities can result in charges of reverse discrimination.
2. Which challenge do you think will be more difficult for Walmart: diversifying its top-management ranks or ending charges of discrimination? Why?
I believe that diversifying its top-management ranks will be proven more of a challenge for Walmart than ending charges of discrimination. Walmart as the largest private employer in the United States, it is easy for them to do a payoff and make these charges go away as the have been doing for years. But diversifying its top-management ranks will require for them to sponsor training programs designed to teach employees about differences among groups. These efforts will be intended to make women and minorities feel respected. Also, these actions can support equal employment opportunity by cultivating an environment in which women and minorities feel welcome and able to do their best as top-management. Valuing diversity will also mean for them to modify the organization’s mission and strategy in order to include the categories protected by law.
In fact if they are willing to diversifying its top-management ranks, they will have a competitive advantage that brings them a wider pool of talent and greater insight into the needs and...