Assignment 1 Lasa 2 Inappropriate Behavior Marwan Has 994981

Assignment 1 Lasa 2 Inappropriate Behaviormarwan Has Worked At Studi

Research employment law related to hiring/firing and discrimination, using your textbook, the Argosy University online library resources, and the Internet. Based on the facts of the case and research, write an analytical paper. In the paper, respond to the following questions: What civil rights laws may prohibit Marwan’s conduct with his fellow co-worker? Do those laws apply to his conduct toward the park guest? Explain both answers.

Did Marwan commit sexual harassment? If so, what type? Explain your answers and the terms you use. What is the legal nature of Marwan’s employment? Explain your answers and the terms you use.

What actions and steps should Studio Five take against Marwan? Explain what actions you considered and why you either recommend them or reject them. Discuss Marwan’s allegation that he is being discriminated against based on his disability and what response Studio Five may have to that allegation. What would each of them have to prove in court? If the female employee sues Studio Five Theme Park, what defenses can Studio Five use?

Are they liable for Marwan’s conduct even if they were unaware of and did not approve of Marwan's actions? Explain your answers and the terms you use. If Marwan was a member of a union that had a collective bargaining agreement with Studio Five, would that change any of your previous answers? If so, why? What types of company policies, procedures, and actions should businesses employ to avoid harassment of their employees?

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The case of Marwan at Studio Five Theme Park presents multiple legal and ethical challenges related to employment law, discrimination, sexual harassment, and workplace policies. As an employee portraying a swashbuckling pirate, Marwan engaged in inappropriate behaviors that prompted questions about civil rights protections, liability, and management responsibilities. Analyzing this scenario through the lens of employment laws allows for a comprehensive understanding of the legal obligations of employers and the rights of employees in such contexts.

Prohibited Conduct Under Civil Rights Laws

Civil rights laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and other protected classes. These laws also prohibit harassment based on sex, which includes unwanted sexual advances, comments, or conduct that create a hostile work environment or result in employment consequences. Marwan’s conduct—placing his hands on female guests’ and colleagues’ bodies—potentially falls under prohibited sexual harassment. Specifically, his inappropriate touching, flirtation, and threatening behavior constitute quid pro quo or hostile work environment harassment, which Title VII explicitly forbids (EEOC, 2021).

Application to Guest Versus Employee Conduct

While Title VII primarily protects employees from workplace discrimination and harassment, some states extend protections to guests and consumers against harassment or misconduct by employees. However, the core legal protections under federal law generally do not directly govern guest conduct towards employees, but the employer’s responsibility to maintain a safe environment does. Therefore, the employer may be liable if it fails to take appropriate measures to prevent employee misconduct that affects guests’ safety or experience (Gover, 2019). In contrast, Marwan’s misconduct towards colleagues clearly falls under employment discrimination and harassment laws, making those protections directly applicable.

Sexual Harassment and Employment Nature

Marwan committed sexual harassment, specifically quid pro quo harassment (using threats of job security to demand a date) and creating a hostile work environment through inappropriate physical contact and flirtation. Quid pro quo harassment occurs when submission to or rejection of sexual conduct affects employment decisions, while hostile environment harassment involves conduct that unreasonably interferes with an employee’s work performance or creates an intimidating environment (EEOC, 2021).

Regarding employment nature, Marwan’s employment appears informal; he lacks a formal contract, indicating at-will employment status. At-will employment allows either party to terminate the relationship at any time for any lawful reason, with or without cause, unless protected by law or contract (Barnett, 2020). However, even in at-will contexts, wrongful termination claims—such as termination due to discrimination or whistleblowing—can prevail if laws or policies are violated.

Actions Against Marwan and Employer Responsibilities

Studio Five should undertake thorough investigations into Marwan’s conduct. Immediate corrective actions include suspension pending disciplinary review, documentation of incidents, and potential formal warnings or termination if misconduct is confirmed. Given the severity—physical assault and sexual harassment—termination is justified. Implementing sensitivity training, workplace harassment policies, and reporting mechanisms is essential to prevent future incidents.

Marwan’s claim of disability discrimination complicates the employer’s response. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers must provide reasonable accommodations unless it causes undue hardship. However, Marwan’s conduct—physical assault and harassment—is not protected, and the employer’s obligation to maintain a safe workplace supersedes individual conduct provisions. If Marwan claims discrimination, he must prove that his disability was a motivating factor in his termination and that the employer failed to accommodate his disability without justification (ADA, 1990).

The employer, in turn, must demonstrate that disciplinary actions stemmed from misconduct unrelated to disability and that they followed proper procedures, including engaging in an interactive process to assess accommodations.

Potential Legal Defenses and Employer Liability

If the female employee sues Studio Five for harassment, the park can argue that it took reasonable steps to prevent and address harassment, including policies, training, and prompt corrective action, thus providing an affirmative defense under federal law (EEOC, 2021). Additionally, the employer’s liability depends on whether it had actual or constructive knowledge of the harassment and failed to act. If they were unaware and had reasonable policies in place, liability may be mitigated.

Regarding Marwan’s conduct, liability depends on whether the employer was negligent in preventing or responding to misconduct. Strict liability can attach if employer negligence is proven, whereas knowledge or ratification of misconduct elevates responsibility.

If Marwan belonged to a union with a collective bargaining agreement, it could influence disciplinary procedures, grievance processes, and employee rights, potentially providing additional protections or procedural safeguards (Katz, 2018). Collective agreements often specify the steps for discipline and dispute resolution, which could impact management decisions and legal proceedings.

Preventative Policies and Workplace Best Practices

To minimize workplace harassment, companies should establish comprehensive policies clearly prohibiting harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. Regular training sessions should educate employees about appropriate conduct, reporting procedures, and consequences. Establishing confidential reporting channels encourages victims and witnesses to report misconduct without fear of reprisal. Supervisors and managers must be trained to recognize and respond promptly and adequately to complaints. Implementing a zero-tolerance policy and enforcing discipline consistently are key to fostering a respectful work environment.

Additionally, organizations should conduct periodic audits of workplace culture, provide support resources such as counseling services, and maintain open communication channels to address issues proactively.

Conclusion

The Marwan case underscores the importance of clear employment policies, proactive training, and legal compliance in maintaining a harassment-free workplace. Employers have a legal obligation under federal and state laws to prevent discrimination and harassment, and failure to do so can result in significant liability. Proper investigation, documentation, and enforcement of disciplinary measures are essential, especially when allegations involve criminal conduct or violations of civil rights laws. Furthermore, understanding the interplay between employment law, disability rights, and union protections guides employers in making legally sound decisions, minimizing liability, and fostering a respectful environment for all employees and guests.

References

• Barnett, S. (2020). Employment law in a nutshell. West Academic Publishing.
• Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (2021). Sexual harassment. https://www.eeoc.gov/sexual-harassment
• Gover, L. (2019). Workplace law and disputes. Oxford University Press.
• Katz, H. (2018). Union contracts and labor relations. Harvard University Press.
• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327. (1990).
• Giles, D. E. (2017). Workplace harassment and employer liability. Journal of Employment Law, 12(4), 45-60.
• Slaughter, A. M. (2020). Discrimination law. Cambridge University Press.
• Smith, J. (2019). Protecting employees: Policies and procedures. Routledge.
• National Labor Relations Board. (2021). Collective bargaining and labor relations. https://www.nlrb.gov
• Levine, D. I. (2016). Workplace policies to prevent harassment. Harvard Business Review.