Organizations need to approach matters of employment consciously with due observation of the law. It is important to adopt a prudent approach that seeks to limit potential or any legal liabilities. The safest way to achieve this is through the practice of rule of law which involves observation of the law to the letter. In that context, it is the recommendation of this paper that organizations take cognizance of various employment laws and there requirements thereof. Some of the critical laws include Title VII, Equal Pay Law, Occupational Safety and Health Act, among other laws.
While the laws provide for various rights and freedoms to employees, it is essential to equally appreciate the overriding objective of these laws. The law places the duty on employers to avoid in every possible of discrimination at workplace. Title VII, for instance, provides for penalties in cases of disparate impact and disparate treatment violations. The overall gist of the laws is that the employer must ensure the employee or class of employee is not discriminated against. It is essential to comply with these laws in general and specifically for various reasons. Foremost, it would limit the organizational risks of legal costs and liabilities in turn reducing the contingencies and overall operations costs. Secondly, compliance earns the organization a good reputation in the eyes of society. This could turn into higher rates of activities and transaction due to the good social relations. Lastly, organizational compliance sits well with what the law requires of them. It is expected that the organizations in appreciation of the rule of law and the need for societal order comply with what is provided in statute and other laws without fail.
In that context, for organizations to limit their liabilities, they ought to observe the provisions to the letter. In addition, organizations are advised to continually conduct analysis of their policies and rules and ensure they are in tandem with the spirit and character of the law. Any form of inconsistencies need to be corrected before a litigation arises therefrom. This approach, called the proactive approach, affords the employer a reasonable defence which may defeat or at least mitigate the situation upon rise to litigation.
The recommended approach is not cast on stone. The main objective of the employer needs to be ensuring that the employees are not discriminated against. In that context, it would be prudent to have any proposal in relation to matters of employment including but not limited to human resource functions such selection, promotion, training and termination perused by the legal advisors of the entity. This ought to be with the view of taking into cognizance the legal issues involved and the manner in which the law ought to be circumvented so as to arrive at the best decision. This approach would limit the chances of messing and or misapplying proposals and mechanisms that lack any legal backing and considerations. In addition, the entity is best advised to have either a sitting or an external legal department. This department would be charged with the task of recommending structures and operations in which the progressive provisions of employment laws would be implemented and incorporated in the organizational activities. This would earn the organization the rare yet important quality of legal proactivity and evade any cases of litigations.
References
Blum, B. A. (2010). Contracts: Examples and Explanations. Sydney: Aspen Law & Business.
Collins, E. C. (2012). Employment Law Review. Law Business Research, 1-799.
Gutman, A., & Dunleavy, E. (2013, February 12). On the Legal Front: The Supreme Court Ruling in Ricci v. Destefano. Retrieved July 23, 2013, from Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology: http://www.siop.org/tip/oct09/08gutman.aspx
Lewis, D. L. (2009). Essentials of Employment Law. New York: CIPD Publishing.
MacMillan, C., & Stone, R. (2012). Elements of the law of contract. University of London International Programmes, 1-245. Retrieved from http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/sites/default/files/programme_resources/laws/ug_subject_guides/elements_law_contract-subjectguide4chapters.pdf
Rush, J., & Ottley, M. (2009). Business Law. New York: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Schmidt, D. (2008). Dealing with Pluralism: A Response to Michael Zigarelli's Article on How Title VII Erodes the Mission of the Religious University. International Journal of Value-Based Management, 61-73.
Shaw, W. H. (2010). Business Ethics: A Textbook With Cases. New York: Cengage Learning.
