Employment Laws and Employee Protections: A Legal Analysis

This report analyzes key aspects of employment law, including federal and state regulations designed to protect employees from discrimination. It examines recent legislation, such as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Equal Pay Act, and discusses instances where federal and state laws may conflict. The report also thoroughly explains the Employment-at-Will (EAW) doctrine, detailing its exceptions such as public policy, implied contract, and implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The report includes scenarios involving potential wrongful termination, analyzing whether employer decisions align with the law and identifying applicable exceptions to the EAW doctrine. Additionally, it explores workers' compensation benefits, including the rights of undocumented workers, and the impact of immigration laws on employment practices. The report references relevant case law and provides a comprehensive overview of the legal landscape concerning employee protections in the workplace.

Running head: EMPLOYMENT LAWS
EMPLOYMENT LAWS
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

1EMPLOYMENT LAWS
1.
Employers are prohibited to discriminate against employees on the ground of race, sex,
caste, creed, religion, color, nationality, and sexual orientation. Numerous federal laws forbid
workplace discrimination, which includes:
 Equal Pay Act, 1963;
 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 1964;
 Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 1967;
 Americans with Disabilities Act, 1990; and
 Civil Rights Act, 1991
All of the above-mentioned laws are implemented by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) of the US. This prohibits discrimination against workers in training,
recruiting, wages and classification. They also forbid termination for an employee who reports
discrimination or who is interested in an investigation into discrimination at the workplace
(Krieger et al., 2008). However, among these Acts two are discussed below:
Age Discrimination in Employment Act
Employers are forbidden from discriminating based on age under the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967. The prohibited activities are closely related to the
procedures defined in Title VII which cover workers from 40 to 65 years. The Age
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 provides clear benefits, insurance, and pension
schemes guidance. The law has been explained in three separate areas by the US Supreme Court
during the period 2007-2008. First, distinct impact lawsuits brought in compliance with ADEA

2EMPLOYMENT LAWS
also require evidence that the program or system that has produced the alleged disparate impact
is discriminatory. A contrasting argument is that the employer has formed a strategy or scheme
that appears fair in his face, but secretly discriminates according to age. Concerning this item, the
burden of proof lies to the plaintiff. Secondly, workers who request an ‘intake questionnaire’ for
adjustment to the Equals Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), have complied with
the status restriction provision and may then bring proceedings to court within 60 days of a
suspected ADEA breach. There is no need to file an official charge. Third, a claimant-employee
can now file a private suit against federal employers for retribution under the ADEA. Such
private proceedings are reserved for plaintiffs dealing with reprisals because the claimant-
employee has already filed a claim on discrimination against the age of those workers (Bjelland
et al., 2010).
The Equal Pay Act
Briefly, the Equal Pay Act (EPA), 1963 forbids gender-based pay discrimination and
specifies that males and females shall receive an equal wage in the same workplace, for the
considerably fair work. All kinds of compensation, such as payments, bonuses, holidays and
vacation pay and other advantages are included in it. This specific Act also permits people to sue
for discrimination on the ground of payment claims, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Employers are not lawfully permitted to repress workers who take action against unfair
employment practices. However, the legislation provides for pay differentials when people are
assessed based on factors such as superiority, production levels, and quality (Giapponi &
McEvoy, 2005).

3EMPLOYMENT LAWS
State legislation only governs the residents of a specific State, but federal legislation
extends to all U.S. citizens. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution codifies the Supremacy Clause
according to which federal law is considered to be the ‘supreme law of the land’. The meaning of
it is that judges in all states must comply with the Constitution, the rules and the Treaties of the
federal government regarding those matters which are under the direct or indirect control of the
government, Under the doctrine of preemption, the basis of which is the Supremacy Clause,
federal legislation frequently anticipates State law in the case of conflict of law. Therefore, it
may be appropriate for a Federal Court to require that a State avoid such actions that it believes
in or clashes with federal law. However, in the absence of federal laws, however, or if State law
would provide more protections than are required under the current federal law for customers,
workers and other citizens, State legislation applies (NeJaime, 2012). For example, LGBTQ
people are not included as a protected class under federal anti-discrimination law. Thus, an
openly homosexual employee in Kansas may legally be dismissed on the ground of sexual
orientation. Nevertheless, if the sexual orientation or gender identity has been a factor in
dismissal, then an Illinois employee can claim compensation for unlawful termination according
to state law.
2.
Employment ties in all the US states except Montana are considered to be ‘at-will’. The
United States is one of a few nations where employment is mostly voluntary. In most countries
worldwide, employers can only terminate workers for justifiable reasons. Some of the reasons
for upholding ‘at-will’ assumption are to value contractual equality, employer respect and the
faith that both employers and employees are in favour of working relationships rather than job
security.

4EMPLOYMENT LAWS
Employment-at-Will means, for any reason other than an unlawful one or no cause and
without lawful obligation, an employer may dismiss an employee at any point in time. Similarly,
an employee is also free to leave the job for any reason at any moment without adverse legal
implications. If work is voluntary, this provision will usually be included clearly in the
applicable contract of employment. Employment-at-Will also implies that the terms and
conditions of the employment relationship can be changed by an employer at any time without
prior announcement or consequences. For instance, an employer can revise wages, end benefits
or minimize paid-off time (Garrett & Rhine, 2010).
Exceptions
There exist several causes why the dismissal of an employment contract may still be
illegal, even if it indicates will. Usually, these exceptions differ from one state to another.
i) Public Policy Exception: An employer is prohibited by public policy exemption,
which contradicts existing state public policy, from firing employees. For instance, in
numerous nations, an employee cannot be fired for filing a worker's compensation
claim after being injured at the workplace. Most of the countries do not permit
employers to fire workers for failure to violate the law on request of them. In a
particular state, the requirements for what violates government policy differs from
one state.
ii) Implied Contract Exception: It means that a worker may have a long term
commitment or permanent employment depending on something that was carried out
by the supervisor. This can take the form of declarations by company, a workplace

5EMPLOYMENT LAWS
standard for which workers are only firing for reasons, or assurance in the staff
manual that certain dismissal procedures are followed.
iii) Implied Covenant of Good faith and Fair dealing: it has been recognized by numerous
countries in an employment relationship. Under this clause, an employer cannot
typically fire or dismiss a worker in bad faith if the termination is malicious (Gertz,
2017).
 The most rapidly growing and confounding area for labor law is religious faith. There are
detailed recommendations provided by the EEOC in this regard. Most of the employers in
the U.S. are not allowed to discriminate by religion, have to modify their religious views
and practices fairly and have to protect other workers from the inappropriate religious
behavior of their co-workers or managers. It is also applicable to at-will workers. Putting
religious literature at break time is not unlawful, therefore if Robert gets terminated by
Peter can sue against him for wrongful termination.
 As per section 8 of the National Labour Relations Act (NLRA) of the U.S., a worker
cannot be lawfully terminated for organizing union as it is a right u/s 7 of the NLRA.
Even the protection is applicable for at-will employees. If an employer does so it will be
treated as breach of section 8 but it cannot stop an employer from firing union organizers.
Thus, if Seth get terminated by Lori can sue against her for wrongful termination.
 Paternity leave is a right of an employee which cannot be refused without reason. In this
given scenario Lori refused it because it is tax season. Thus, however, for this reason, a
worker cannot be terminated even if he is an at-will employee. Thus, if Brian gets
terminated by Lori can sue against her for wrongful termination.

6EMPLOYMENT LAWS
 In the U.S., it is the right of the workers to get a safe and healthy working environment
by its manager. It applies to at-will workers. The responsibility lies on the employer for
creating. The legal termination of a worker is valid if he/she violates any law related to
employment. Thus, if Jackson gets terminated by Jerry can sue against him for wrongful
termination.
3.
Any individual injured in the workplace while performing assigned tasks could be
entitled to get workers’ compensation benefits from employers, which is an insurance program
for workers who suffer injuries or diseases related to their jobs. In general, there are three
necessities for employee compensation allowances, which include:
 The employer or organization under which a person works, must carry or required to be
carried lawfully workers’ compensation insurance;
 That person needs to be a worker of that person or organization; and
 The injury or illness of that person must relate to the work.
In the United States, non-documented immigrants are not lawfully permitted to work. The
Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) is a federal law of the U.S. that directs employers
to check whether their workers are eligible to work in the United States (Jennings, 2014).
Multiple infringements under the law for each unauthorized worker may cost an employer up to
$10000. In some cases in which illegal immigrant workers had been injured at work, employers
sought to use IRCA to refuse the insurance of undocumented workers. Employers may argue that
as the non-documented employees who work in the United States do not have the right to do so,

7EMPLOYMENT LAWS
they are not legitimately workers and thus unable to receive reimbursement from employers
(Feltman, 2008).
In the Tiger Transmission vs. Industrial Commission of Arizona [2003] case the court
held that the expression employee includes aliens and minors lawfully or unlawfully allowed to
work for hire.
Further, in Champion Auto Body vs. Gallegos [1997] case the court was of the view that
unlawful aliens may gather injury assistance concerning work if the injury is related to the
workplace.
Therefore, as per the expression of equality before the law and equal protection of the law
as mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, it can be said that non-documented workers also need to
get workers’ compensation to protect themselves from the immoral employers as many
judgments given in the favour of the non-documented workers.
Many state laws differ from the federal law regarding immigration law and require
undocumented immigrants to receive compensation from employers. In many countries,
immigrants without valid and legal documents may receive compensation from employers, as the
State statute explicitly includes non-documented workers. Several states which include non-
documented immigrants are Arizona, Colorado, California, Hawaii, and Texas (Provine &
Varsanyi, 2012).

8EMPLOYMENT LAWS
Reference
Bjelland, M. J., Bruyere, S. M., Von Schrader, S., Houtenville, A. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, A., &
Webber, D. A. (2010). Age and disability employment discrimination: Occupational
rehabilitation implications. Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 20(4), 456-471.
Feltman, R. (2008). Undocumented Workers in the United States: Legal, Political, and Social
Effects. Rich. J. Global L. & Bus., 7, 65.
Garrett, T. A., & Rhine, R. M. (2010). Economic freedom and employment growth in US
states. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Working Paper No.
Gertz, S. C. (2017). At-will employment: Origins, applications, exceptions, and expansions in
public service. In American Public Service (pp. 47-74). Routledge.
Giapponi, C. C., & McEvoy, S. A. (2005). The legal, ethical, and strategic implications of gender
discrimination in compensation: Can the Fair Pay Act succeed where the Equal Pay Act
has failed?. Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 12(2).
Jennings, M. M. (2014). Business: Its legal, ethical, and global environment. Nelson Education.
Krieger, N., Chen, J. T., Waterman, P. D., Hartman, C., Stoddard, A. M., Quinn, M. M. &
Barbeau, E. M. (2008). The inverse hazard law: blood pressure, sexual harassment, racial
discrimination, workplace abuse and occupational exposures in US low-income black,
white and Latino workers. Social science & medicine, 67(12), 1970-1981.

9EMPLOYMENT LAWS
NeJaime, D. (2012). Marriage inequality: same-sex relationships, religious exemptions, and the
production of sexual orientation discrimination. California Law Review, 1169-1238.
Provine, D. M., & Varsanyi, M. W. (2012). Scaled Down: Perspectives on State and Local
Creation and Enforcement of Immigration Law Introduction to the Special Issue of Law
& Policy. Law & Pol'y, 34, 105.