Legal Options for Discrimination Based on Political Affiliation

This article discusses the legal options available to individuals who face discrimination based on their political affiliation. It explores a case study where a job applicant was denied employment due to his political views and analyzes the potential legal actions that can be taken. The article also examines the justification for smoker discrimination in the workplace.

Surname 1
Student’s Name
Instructor’s Name
Course
Date
Business Law
Legal Options Available Due to Discrimination Based on Political Affiliation
In a case study, Nesbitt was a young and brilliant laws school graduate. After completion
of his studies, he applied for a job position at Dewey, Gate, and Howe, which is one of the best
laws firms in Pikeville. Nesbitt had a successful interview with Dillan Dewey, who is the
managing partner of the firm. Due to his Nesbitt’s brilliance, the manager agreed that it would be
great to hire him as part of the team. However, after the interview, there was a short conversation
between Dewey and Nesbitt about the political views of each person given that the provincial
elections were nearing. Dewey was a people’s party supporter while Nesbitt did not shy away
from showing strong support for the Freedom party which he was strongly affiliated to. The
interview quickly came to a halt after a short discussion and opinions about the respective
political parties. Two weeks after the interview, Nesbitt received a letter from the manager
indicating that he would not be hired due to his political affiliations and given that 50 % of the
clients of the legal firm belong to the People’s party.
It is a high level of discrimination when a person is treated unfairly due to their political
affiliations. Despite his brilliance and talents, Nesbitt was denied an opportunity to work with the
law firm just because he was a strong supporter of the freedom party. Nesbitt’s political views
became worse when he stated that he was a supporter of a different political party which is
different from what the manager supported.

Surname 2
It is the goal of any organization or firm to recruit the employees who fit the job
specification of a company. Human resource managers always look for valuable talents and
exceptional skills when recruiting or hiring their workforce. Another, main feature that the
organizations look for in employees is the adaptability to the organization's culture and goal
(Besley 345). These goals and culture are oriented towards productivity and profitability of the
business. However, some employers discriminate their employees based on their political
affiliations, which is against the labor and employment laws. An example is a discrimination for
a position just because the manager and the employees have different political believes, as seen
in the case study between Dewey and Nesbitt.
The law protects people from being discriminated from the job position due to the
differences in political views or political affiliations. Therefore, Nesbitt can sue Dewey because
he denied him an equal opportunity as others based on his political stand rather than his abilities
in the workplace (Baert 69). Nesbitt has an option of seeking a legal charge against Dewey since
the labor laws state that the employers are not supposed to discriminate the employees or
candidates based on who they chose to be their political leader or the party they choose to
belong. Every person has the right and freedom to choose the political party for which he is
affiliated.
However, Dewey might be justified to deny Nesbitt an opportunity to work with the firm
if his political affiliations would bring a negative impact to the business. If Nesbitt is a threat to
the success of the business, the organization have no option other than to discriminate him and
deny him a chance to work with the firm (Gift 654). Some of the actions that might cause Dewey
to deny Nesbitt an opportunity to work with the organization are if his political affiliations or
debate lead to the loss of the clients. It worth noting that most of the clients of the firm are

Surname 3
affiliated to the people’s party. That means that Nesbitt can be a threat to the company,
especially if he is always involved in politics without the client’s willingness.
Justification for Smoker Discrimination
If Dewey refused to hire Nesbitt because he was a smoker, the case would change.
Smoking is a vice that presents many health hazards to both active and passive smokers. Second-
Hand smokers are exposed to more health problems that first-hand smokers. For this reason,
smoking is not legalized in the working places. The employment laws persuade employers to
protect their employees from all the dangers that would be harmful or risk their health. It would,
therefore, be the responsibility for Dewey to employ the employees who do not pollute the
working environment of the other employees. This option would make Dewey’s actions to
discriminate Nesbitt from working in the law firm (Garza 31). Although that law states that each
person is supposed to be given an equal opportunity by an organization, it would not be sensible
to provide the smoker’s equal opportunity since they present health threats to other employees.
Therefore, Nesbitt would not have any option to sue the organization for denying him a chance
to work if he was a smoker.
Also, the legal firm managed by Dewey deals with clients who keep coming back for the
good services offered by the firm. Clients establish loyalty due to the quality of the services
offered by a particular organization. Some of the clients are conscious about the health issues
brought about by smoking habits. That would mean that allowing Nesbit to work with the firm
would lower clients’ expectations about the firm. The firm would, in turn, lose the clients who
would mean that the business would not be sustainable (Pattison 29). Therefore, if Nesbitt were a
smoker, denying him, an opportunity would be a better choice for the organization because he
would pose a threat to the business. Despite the brilliance possessed by Nesbitt, the clients might

Surname 4
be unwilling to approach him for the services due to his smoking habits. This would also mean
that the Nesbitt would not be as useful to the organization as compared to the non-smoker
employees.
On the contrary, it can also be argued that the employer is not supposed to deny the
employees the opportunities even if they are smokers. Both smokers and non-smokers have the
right to equal employment opportunities since the priority for an organization is the employee's
capability. Smoking is also not an illegal activity as it is no illegalized by the law. Therefore,
smoking is a lawful private and off-duty activity (Pattison, 29). This follows that the employer's
discrimination of the smokers would be an infringement of the employee's freedom and rights to
engage in a legal off-duty activity. From our case study, Nesbitt is a qualified legal officer since
he had recently graduated from one of the best law schools. Owing to these facts, he has the
required skills and talents that the employer would be looking for. Although Nesbitt does not
have any option to sue the Dewey for job discrimination, it would be an unethical issue to deny
him an opportunity.
Observation exists at the commencement and again after the process: at the beginning, to
determine more certainly and accurately the nature of the struggle to be dealt with; at the end, to
test the value of some hypothetically entertained conclusion. Between those two termini of
observation, we find the more distinctively mental aspects of the entire thought-cycle : (i)
inference, the suggestion of an explanation or solution, (ii) reasoning, the development of the
bearings and implications of the suggestion. Reasoning requires some experimental observation
to confirm it, while experiment can be economically and fruitfully conducted only

Surname 5
In today's workplaces, smoking has been highly discouraged, and the organization is
supposed to declare their premises as non-smoking zones. However, the smokers are supposed to
access a designated smoking chamber where the non-smokers would not be affected by the
second-hand smoke. These are supposed to the employer's adjustments within the workplaces so
that the organizations can accommodate every employee (Gift 654). Therefore, Dewey bought to
have established such zones so that employees like Nesbitt can have equal opportunities in the
firm.
Legal Actions That Would be taken by Hellen to Obtain Compensation
In a case study, a Zeb was an inmate who was confined for a role that he had played in a
clever fraud. The prisoner had not shown any signs of violence while in prison, but he was
yearning to be released and have his freedom again. Zeb was ill, and he had to be transferred to
the hospital in a standard prison van. During his transfer to the hospital, the inmate was no
restricted or handcuffed since the prison warden knew that he was a non-violent and a low-risk
inmate. Zeb had been transferred this way many times, and therefore, the prison warden in
charge did not see any danger of transferring him when he was not handcuffed. On their journey
to the hospital, the weather was not so good as there was a good deal of snow all over the road
surfaces. Also, there was an accident ahead, and therefore, the vehicles had to move slowly. This
was an excellent opportunity for Zeb to escape. As the van that had carried Zeb stopped, the
driver walked out of it to check what had happened ahead. Suddenly, Zeb knocked down Melvin
whom they had been sitting together at the back of the van and escaped.
Zeb ran across the heavy traffic and moved towards Hellen who was driving alone.
Hellen thought that Zeb was a motorist and he was experiencing trouble. She stopped and rolled

Surname 6
down the vehicle's window. Again, Zeb saw another opportunity where he punched Hellen and
took control of the vehicle. After driving for some few kilometers, he stopped and gave Hellen
several punches and threw her into a ditch. Hellen suffered several injuries since she broke her
collar bone and her tooth was knocked out. To make it even worse, the traumatic experience that
she got causes her to experience a nightmare.
Prison escape is referred to a bust out or break out where a prisoner leaves prison
unofficially or illegally. Whenever a prisoner escapes, the authorities try to recapture and detain
the inmate. Escaping from prison is a criminal offense in most countries, and specifically the
United States of America and worldwide and such an offense can highly lead to an extension on
the jail time and further increased security on the inmate. Further officers are allowed to shoot
and kill any prisoner attempting to escape especially if they assaulted an officer and are a danger
to the civilians. Usually, many prisoners come up with their methods, and the correctional
officers have to come up with preventive measures to avoid repeat situations. Ze, who was
uncuffed, found the holes in the security details and exploited them by assaulting the officer
Melvin Melrose and further escaping.
According to the case study, Hellen is a victim of crime. A victim of crime is supposed to
be protected by the laws since they may experience physical injury, fear, or trauma. The crime
committed by Zeb led to the suffering of Hellen since she broke her collar bone and lost one of
her teeth. Also, Hellen constantly experiences nightmares that she hardly sleep or even drive
when alone. Hellen has the right to apply for the victims of felonies so that she can be granted
legal compensation for the injuries. The case study indicates that she was physically harmed as a
result of the escaping prisoner (LaFerney 74). The physical harm caused guarantees Hellen
financial compensation. Also, Hellen used her funds to seek the treatment for the injuries

Surname 7
sustained. She can seek financial compensation for the financial loss sustained through a legal
process. The financial compensation should cater to her medical bills as well as the
inconveniences caused due to the injuries.
Another thing is that Hellen could not drive alone again. She also cannot sleep due to a
series of nightmares that she constantly experiences. These experiences are not physical harm,
but they are referred to as trauma due to the prior traumatizing occurrence. Hellen can also seek
for the legal charges against Zeb since he caused this fear to her (Miers 148). In the presentation
of the case, it can be argued that Hellen will need a psychology therapist so that he or she can
help her overcome the trauma. There will be costs associated with the services, and therefore, she
will need compensation. Besides, Hellen will no longer drive alone, and she might now need a
chauffeur. A personal driver will be an added expense which she had not planned for. It,
therefore, calls for her financial compensation so that she can keep carrying out her daily duties.
Due to the physical injuries and the post-violence traumatic experiences, Hellen cannot
be able to attend to her work for the next six months. The Absence from her workplace will
result in financial loss associated with employment benefits. Such losses will impact Hellen’s life
negatively as she cannot any longer continue paying her bills or living a good quality of life.
Hellen is therefore supposed to seek financial compensation so that she can help reduce the loss.
Also, failure to attend o her job for the next six months might cost Hellen her job (Hebly 27).
Some employers would not tolerate an employee to remain out of the organization for quite an
extended period. The employer would replace the employees so that the organization can
continue in its operation. Such a scenario will cause Hellen to lose her job permanently. Due to
such possibilities, legal action is necessary so that Hellen can receive appropriate compensation.

Surname 8
After the crime, Hellen experienced residual mobility difficulties. That means that she
would not be able to participate in her favorite hobbies, which are skiing and golfing. It follows
that the incidence will negatively and permanently impact her lifestyle. Hellen’s social life will
be adversely affected as she will no longer be able to meet with friends and golf team members.
Therefore, the incidence presents a life-changing occurrence for her (Kunst 3027). This might
add to her distress and increase her traumatic experience as a result. Due to such reasons, Hellen
should seek financial compensation through legal action. She deserves compensation since she
was a victim of the criminal circumstance.
The prison warden who drove the correctional van carrying Zeb already knew that the
prisoner was yearning for a chance to be out of the prison. Also, they knew that Zeb was very
cunning since he was involved in a very cleverly executed fraud scheme. These were enough
signs to the wardens that Zeb was no low-risk inmate. Therefore, those who were involved in the
transfer of the Zeb to the hospital were liable to the incidence that happened and injured Hellen
(Goel 113). It was an act of negligence for the driver to stop a prisoner carrying van an even
move out of the vehicle leaving behind an unrestricted prisoner. Thus, Hellen is supposed to sue
those who were responsible for the transfer of the inmate since they did not take the appropriate
measure that should be applied when handling an inmate who may pose a threat to the members
of the public as Zeb did.
However, Hellen might also be in the wrong and involved in the act of negligence that
led to her injury and physical harm. Her act of stopping the car and rolling down her window to
let in a running stranger might cost her compensation. It can be argued that Hellen’s act of
negligence caused her to be a victim of violence. There were many other motorists on the same
road at the same time as Hellen. However, the other drivers were not harmed by the escape of the

Surname 9
inmate since they did not open their windows for. Were it not for her stopping the car and
entertaining the stranger she would not have had any trouble (Goel 114). Therefore, Hellen might
not receive the compensation package even though she had suffered physically and financially as
a result of her actions. However, looking at all the possibilities, many considerations will make
Hellen receive financial compensation. The reason is that most of the events that lead to her
suffering were mainly caused by the Zeb and the negligence 0of the prison wardens failing to
restrict the inmate during the transfer.

Surname 10
Work Cited
Besley, Timothy, and Abigail Payne. Judicial accountability and economic policy outcomes:
Evidence from employment discrimination charges. No. 03/11. IFS Working Papers,
Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), (2003): 342-354.
Baert, Stijn. "Hiring discrimination: an overview of (almost) all correspondence experiments
since 2005." Audit studies: Behind the scenes with theory, method, and nuance. Springer,
Cham, 2018. 63-77.
Gift, Karen, and Thomas Gift. "Does politics influence hiring? Evidence from a randomized
experiment." Political Behavior37.3 (2015): 653-675.
Goel, Kirti, Parul Goel, and Sumit Goel. "Negligence and its legal implications for dental
professionals: a review." TMU J. Dent 1.3 (2014): 113-118.
Garza, Jennifer Bruno, et al. "0231 Acute inflammatory response to secondhand smoke exposure
among non-smoking construction workers: a repeated measure study0231 Acute
inflammatory response to secondhand smoke exposure among non-smoking construction
workers: repeated measures study." Occup Environ Med 71.Suppl 1 (2014): A31-A32.
Hebly, Marnix R., Josanne DM Van Dongen, and Siewert D. Lindenbergh. "Crime Victims'
Experiences with Seeking Compensation: A Qualitative Exploration." Utrecht L. Rev. 10
(2014): 27.
Kunst, M. J. J., N. N. Koster, and J. Van Heugten. "Performance evaluations and victim
satisfaction with state compensation for violent crime: A prospective study." Journal of
interpersonal violence 32.19 (2017): 3027-3044.
LaFerney, Michael C. "You can help victims of hazing recover from psychological and physical
harm." Current Psychiatry15.3 (2016): 72-74.

Surname 11
Miers, David. "Offender and state compensation for victims of crime: Two decades of
development and change." International Review of Victimology 20.1 (2014): 145-168.
Pattison, Patricia, Donald E. Sanders, and John Ross. "The Squiggly Line: When Should
Individual Choices be protected from Employment Discrimination?" Southern Law
Journal24.1 (2014): 29.