People's Rights, And Law And Order Quiz

Sex discrimination under Title VII is defined as discrimination based on whether the person is male or female. This means that it is illegal to treat individuals differently or unfairly in the workplace based on their gender. This includes discrimination against both men and women, and it does not matter whether the person is heterosexual or homosexual. The focus is solely on the person's sex or gender identity. Therefore, the correct answer is whether the person is male or female.

This statement is an example of an argument based on justice against discrimination. It suggests that discrimination is unjust because characteristics such as race and sex are generally irrelevant to job performance. This argument is rooted in the principle of proportionate equality, which states that individuals should be treated equally unless there is a justifiable reason to treat them differently. Discrimination based on irrelevant characteristics violates this principle and is therefore considered unjust.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides two defenses for employers facing charges of sex discrimination. The first defense is business necessity, which means that the employer can show that the discriminatory practice is necessary for the normal operation of the business. The second defense is bona fide occupational qualification, which allows employers to discriminate based on sex if it is reasonably necessary for the normal operation of the particular job. Both of these defenses can be used by employers to justify their actions and defend against charges of sex discrimination.

The correct answer is that employers can dismiss employees for any reason and employees can leave at any time. This is true of employment at will, which is a legal doctrine that allows for the termination of employment by either the employer or the employee without any specific cause or reason. This means that employers have the right to fire employees for any reason, as long as it is not discriminatory or in violation of any employment laws. Similarly, employees have the right to quit their job at any time, without providing a specific cause or reason.

John Locke claims that people have a natural right to property, meaning that they have the inherent right to own and possess property. Additionally, Locke argues that individuals also have a property right to their own labor, meaning that they have the right to use their own labor to acquire and improve property. This means that the correct answer is "A natural right to property and a property right to their own labor."

The correct answer is "Neither A nor B". This means that the explicit exclusion of members of a protected class is not considered either disparate treatment or disparate impact. Disparate treatment refers to intentionally treating individuals differently based on their protected characteristics, while disparate impact refers to policies or practices that may have a disproportionately negative effect on members of a protected class, even if there is no intent to discriminate. In this case, the explicit exclusion does not fall under either category.

The given statement is an example of the Kantian argument against discrimination because it emphasizes the importance of treating individuals with dignity and respect. Kantian ethics is based on the principle of treating individuals as ends in themselves, rather than as means to an end. Discrimination goes against this principle as it treats certain individuals as lesser or inferior, thereby violating their fundamental rights.

The correct answer is "All of these." The hidden costs of sexual harassment include absenteeism, low morale, and lawsuits. Absenteeism occurs when employees feel uncomfortable coming to work due to the hostile environment created by sexual harassment. Low morale is a result of the negative impact on employee well-being and job satisfaction. Lawsuits can arise from victims seeking legal recourse for the harm caused by sexual harassment. Therefore, all of these factors contribute to the hidden costs associated with sexual harassment.

The main legal protection for American workers includes public policy exceptions to employment at will, contract law that enforces existing contracts, and contract law that enforces "good faith" standards. These protections ensure that workers are not unfairly terminated, that their contractual agreements are upheld, and that employers act in good faith towards their employees.

The correct answer suggests that Morris Cohen's view, as expressed in Property and Sovereignty, is that the owners of revenue-producing property have power over others, and historically, this power has constituted political sovereignty. This means that those who own property that generates income have the ability to exert control and authority over others, and this control has been recognized as a form of political sovereignty throughout history.

Disparate impact refers to unequal treatment that occurs unintentionally, as a result of practices that may seem neutral but still have a disproportionately negative impact on members of a protected class. In this case, the unequal treatment does not come from explicit exclusion, but rather from practices that indirectly exclude certain individuals. Therefore, the correct answer is disparate impact.

The Supreme Court has determined that all of the given arguments - Compensation, Equality, and Utilitarian - are permissible affirmative action plans. This means that these arguments can be used as justifications for implementing affirmative action policies.

Sexual harassment is mainly an issue of power because it involves the abuse of power dynamics and control over another person. It is not primarily about sex, drugs, rock and roll, or any of the other options listed. Sexual harassment occurs when someone uses their position of power to engage in unwelcome sexual advances or behavior, creating a hostile or intimidating environment for the victim. This abuse of power can occur in various settings, such as the workplace, educational institutions, or personal relationships.

A policy that has disparate impact means that it disproportionately affects a certain group of people based on a protected characteristic, such as race or gender. In order for this policy to be permissible, it must be substantially related to successful performance. This means that the policy must have a clear and direct connection to the job requirements and the ability to perform the job effectively. If the qualification is arbitrary or based solely on the employer's preference, it would not be permissible as it would be discriminatory. Therefore, the correct answer is "Substantially related to successful performance."

This statement is an example of the utilitarian argument against discrimination. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory that focuses on maximizing overall happiness or utility. In this case, the argument suggests that discrimination is wrong because it leads to an economically inefficient matching of people to jobs. By discriminating against certain individuals based on irrelevant factors such as race or gender, society is not making the most efficient use of available human resources, which goes against the utilitarian goal of maximizing overall well-being.

All of these options may not generally enter into a voluntary contract because they lack the legal capacity to fully understand the terms and consequences of the contract. Children are not considered legally competent to enter into contracts. The mentally incompetent may lack the mental capacity to understand and make informed decisions about contracts. The inexperienced and/or ignorant may not have the necessary knowledge or understanding to enter into a contract. Those under duress may be coerced or forced into a contract against their will. Therefore, all of these options may not generally enter into a voluntary contract.

The correct answer is A and B. This means that both options A and B are part of the 1991 Model Employee Termination Act. Option A states that no employee should be dismissed without due cause, which implies that there should be a valid reason for terminating an employee's employment. Option B states that there should be a method of resolving disputes, indicating that there should be a process in place to address any conflicts or disagreements related to employee termination.

Employers can defend themselves against a charge of discrimination by arguing that there are bona fide occupational qualifications. This means that certain characteristics, such as race or sex, are relevant to the job and necessary for its performance. By demonstrating that these qualifications are necessary for the job, employers can justify their actions and defend against allegations of discrimination.

This statement is an example of an ethical argument based on justice against discrimination. It states that discrimination is wrong because it denies individuals the opportunity for self-development, which is an important human good. This argument is rooted in the principle of justice, which emphasizes fairness and equal treatment for all individuals. By denying someone the opportunity for self-development, discrimination goes against the principles of justice and is therefore considered morally wrong.

The correct answer is "All of these". Programs aimed at preventing sexual harassment should include a policy from high in the organization to establish a clear stance against harassment. Effective communication of the policy throughout the organization ensures that all employees are aware of the expectations and consequences. Well-publicized procedures provide a means for reporting and addressing incidents of harassment. Therefore, all of these elements are necessary for an effective sexual harassment prevention program.

In recent years, courts have recognized bad faith and/or malice as an exception to employment at will. This means that if an employer terminates an employee out of bad faith or with malicious intent, the employee may have legal grounds to challenge the termination. This exception provides some protection to employees against unfair and unjust terminations.

According to the given answer, affirmative action is justified because it provides equality of treatment. This means that affirmative action aims to treat individuals equally, regardless of their race or gender, in order to address past discrimination and ensure fairness in opportunities. This perspective argues that affirmative action is necessary to level the playing field and provide equal treatment to all individuals, regardless of their background.

Justice Potter Stewart argued in Perry v. Sindermann that property does not consist merely in ownership of things but denotes a broad range of interests. This means that property includes more than just physical possessions, but also includes various rights and interests that are protected by existing rules or understandings.