Introduction
There is a more or less complete set of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the employment in every country. For example, in the United States it is prohibited to discriminate co-workers on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, pregnancy, membership of trade unions, cancellation of conviction, age, disability (referring to discrimination against the disabled, as well as people suffering from various diseases, including AIDS and serious illnesses, such as deaf, deaf-mutes, midgets) (Aberson, 2015). The laws of several states, such as Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Hawaii, also prohibit discrimination in the employment in connection with the sexual orientation of the employee or worker. Moreover, in the United States people are now actively discussing the phenomenon of "reverse discrimination". The Americans in the struggle for employment justice reached the establishment of the specific benefits for those categories of workers who are most frequently exposed to denial of employment. There may be a quota for older workers and, in case there are 30-year and 60-year-old workers who applied for a position, the employer will decide in favor to the older challenger. However, the Americans are ambiguous in respect to this approach of the fight against discrimination. Litigation on this issue is a very controversial, and therefore the Congress discussed the issue of recognition of "reverse discrimination" (Aberson, 2015).
In Europe as a whole and in the EU Member States in particular, governments have developed one of the most comprehensive and effective models of social policies directed against the discrimination in the workplace. European States have gained considerable experience in this field. Legislation to ban sex discrimination in Sweden, Finland and Italy is formulated in the way its provisions equally apply to both women and men. They do not focus on the fact that only women has to be protected, as more exposed to discrimination in hiring. In Sweden, employers are obliged to ensure that the number of men and women in the company is approximately the same. And if, for example, it turns out that in the company then are more men than women, the employer will be required to give preference to women. Discrimination is evident in other aspects of employment. For example, in the UK every year due to pregnancy over 30 thousand women lose their job. However, only 3% of these people file a complaint to the Employment Tribunal. In most of the economy sectors, there is a ratio of 50-30-15: women make up 50% of university graduates who come to work in the company, 30% of them become middle class managers and only 15% - top managers (Hirsch, 2016). In the US, women make up over a half the population, but less than 15% of members of the boards of directors in the US companies are women and only 13 companies out of the top-500 are headed by women.
Discussion
Measures for the prevention of the most open form of discrimination in the workplace have been implemented starting from the mid-60s of the last century in the UK. The Equal Pay Act 1970 affirms the rights of men and women at equal rates of pay for performance of the same work. In 1983, an amendment to this Act was ratified. According to it, workers have the right to be equally paid for work of equal value (Phillip, 2015). Persons whose rights were violated may submit their application to the court for consideration of industrial action, followed by the use of job evaluation methods to correct the satisfaction of the claim. Adopted in 1975 law about sex discrimination in the UK prohibited discrimination on the basis of this parameter in the selection and recruitment, during the production and vocational training, in the process of identifying additional benefits of employees. This Act also determines the creation of equal opportunities commissions in order to eliminate gender discrimination in the workplace, in educational institutions and in the preparation of other consumer services, promoting equal opportunities and monitoring the effectiveness of the implementation of equal pay laws.
In 2006 in the United Kingdom entered into force law prohibiting discrimination against workers on grounds of age. It is no coincidence: the so-called ageism in the United Kingdom has taken frightening dimensions. As a result, for the period between 1980 - 1990 years, the number of working men older than 50 years has decreased dramatically in almost all branches of industry and business (Hirsch, 2016). This is despite the fact that the official retirement age in the UK is 60 years. Newspapers were filled with the requirements of the "energetic and ambitious," that is young. Since 2006, the situation changed dramatically. British employers could no longer write such statements in the advertisements. Under the new rules, any hints at an ideal age of the applicant - and "energetic" is the best hint - can be regarded as discriminatory. In particular, the list of words, the use of which is prohibited, includes: "energetic", "able", "initiative", "ambitious", "recent graduate", "dynamic", "experienced", and, of course, "young" and "old". From now on, people cannot refuse to hire or fire employees for being too young or too old, just as one cannot deny the employee in taking training courses based on his pre-retirement age. Yet studies have shown that in developed countries, labor market discrimination is widespread, especially against immigrants and minorities (Hirsch, 2016). It should also be noted that employees could still face traditional forms of discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, religion and age in the workplaces in the developed countries.
Another major issue in the field of employment has now become the discrimination against people with disabilities. One of the main reasons for the isolation of this group of people is still a perceived view of them as unproductive workers who are unable to perform job duties as good as people without any disabilities can (Zillman, 2015). The more limited possibilities of worker, the less chances he or she has to find a job.
With regard to gender equality in pay, some countries have adopted laws in this field as the preventive measures. In accordance with their provisions, employers must not discriminate employees in their payoffs based on their gender. They must also take measures to ensure and to promote equal opportunities in wages, including special methods of analysis and evaluation of the remuneration system, as well as to eliminate all identified cases of unequal wages for men and women on the grounds of discrimination (Aberson, 2015). The provision of equal labor wage rate between men and women is very important. The role to control it may belong to specific commissions, endowed with greater powers in terms of countering discrimination.
These days, the European directive on discrimination had been successfully adopted in 15 countries of the European Community. It is aimed at prohibiting any discrimination in the workplace. If to look at this aspect of the leading capitalist countries, it is possible to state the following (Hirsch, 2016). The EU extended the concept of discrimination based on sexual orientation, appearance and name. It also changed the order of reviewing the application for the job: if before the employee was required to provide evidence that the company now has to defend himself against the charges presented.
Specificity of jurisdiction on labor matters in the US is that they are completely engaged in administrative bodies such as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Office of Wages and Working Time, National Clearing-House Control in Labor Conflicts on the Railways etc. A number of countries in the recent years have adopted laws, which provide a so-called positive action to remedy the discrimination facts and to assist the discriminated groups of workers particularly in their working places (Aberson, 2015).
Law of the State of New York (Act 310, Section 1, 2, 3) prohibits discrimination against employees based on their legal political activity in the non-working time. This kind of discrimination can result in deprivation in premiums, lack of access to equipment and resources, denial of employment, preventing promotion, changes in the terms of remuneration and conditions of employment, deprivation of privileges, and so on (Aberson, 2015). Chief state prosecutor or the judge on his behalf may impose penalties, concretized in section 8 of this law.
In the western corporate culture, it is believed that the observance of the principles of political correctness in matters of employment benefits business. According to this theory it is easier for multinational companies to introduce new ideas and to find new customers after taking into account the prinicples of equality between worker. These companies often talk about how important it is to the company's staff to be "heterogeneous" in composition. British organization Employer's Forum on Age released a report in which it called on employers to deal with "outrageous stereotypes" for young and old employees - in other words, with the age limits in hiring.
However, recent studies have cast doubt on the fact that the employer needs to focus more on maintaining the "heterogeneity" composition of staff rather than on the objective tasks of the business. Chareted Institute of Personnel and Development reviewed 50 different studies on the "diversity" of labor, and issued a report "Diversity: Stacking Up the Evidence". It states that it is difficult to determine whether diversity brings direct benefits of labor business. Indeed, according to this report, groups with the representatives of different nationalities give better results and are more prone to innovation. On the other hand, a relationship between employees in such collectives is much harder manageable.
Conclusion
References
Aberson, C. (2015). Positive intergroup contact, negative intergroup contact, and threat as predictors of cognitive and affective dimensions of prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18(6), 743-760. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1368430214556699
Hirsch, A. (2016). Workplace racism is on the rise – we need action, not lip service. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/10/workplace-racism-racial-bullying-discrimination
Phillip, A. (2015). Ruby Tuesday accused of employment discrimination. Against men. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/26/ruby-tuesday-accused-of-employment-discrimination-against-men/
Zillman, C. (2015). Target to pay $2.8 million for discriminatory hiring tests.Fortune. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2015/08/24/target-discriminatory-hiring/
