Greenville Jenkins Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Greenville Jenkins - Essay Example In the Marshalls case, Grenville Jenkins is discriminated against as the member of the Sustainability team because he ought to rectify where he sees excessive spending by the company officials. This is supposed to help in the cost cutting measures of the company. Instead of listening and acting to his claims, the top management ignores him which makes him feel discriminated against. The board of the directors dismisses his allegations instead of seeing into his case by finding relevant measures to counter what he says. Jenkins is frustrated because the law on discrimination of employees does not apply in this case. If were operational, someone could have listened to his allegations and at least put some efforts in rectifying the excesses in the company. As a sustainability member in the company, Jenkins has the right authority to comment about such cases as those of extravagance (EEOC 2009, 1). Maureen Gibson Maureen Gibson, who is the sales representative, is acting against the conf ines of the company regulations. She has turned the working place to a Christian conversion center and does not heed to the instruction. She wears a crucifix on the uniform which against the rules of the company. Even if the law of discrimination suggests that no employ need to be discriminated against her beliefs, Maureen is abusing the opportunity she has been given to the company. When she is warned not t use the company as a preaching ground, she threatens to take legal action, which is an, overreaction. She is supposed to be answerable because of breaking the policies set to enhance equality in the company because she is a distraction to the employees in the company by preaching to them at the wrong place and time (EEOC 2009, 1). The company policy that denies wearing of jewelry on the uniform will counter the case she wants to file for the company. She is defiant and misuses the freedom in the company. She has been performing non business activities in the company premise by m aking the employees uncomfortable. This is against the rules of the company which she chose not to respect. When Maureen is approached by the line manager, she says that she is being denied her rights but, in actual sense she is working out her rights in the wrong place. She is supposed to hearken unto the rules stipulated by the company before taking a step to sue the company. No one is against her work but, the line manager is against her evangelism which affects the comfort of the other workers. The law should also be used to address the case in which the line manager was told about the Maureen’s behavior but ignored. The law should be used to sensitize the company managers and board of directors about the consequence of discrimination (EEOC 2009, 1). Gary Gary who is the primary career of his disabled son needs to be allowed to have flexible working arrangement because he needs to attend to his son needs. Denying Gary that opportunity is as well as discriminating against physical disability. This should be termed as open discrimination be cause the company is in a position to organize a flexible arrangement for Gary to be of use to his disabled son. The company representatives are answerable to the law on discrimination in the company where there is a need to respond to the requests of the company. The company top management who are in the jurisdiction of planning favorable moments for Gary to work