-
Essay / An analysis of Vance v. Ball State University - 1169
Supervisory responsibilities vary depending on the multitude of jobs available in the market; however, certain functions exist in all jobs. Supervisors must decide when to hire, fire, promote, discipline or transfer an employee. For example, it is quite simple to identify a chief probation officer with a defined title and responsibility; however, enthusiastic employees working on their professional development may be selected to take on increasingly responsible tasks within an organization. Many business leaders may choose to delegate tasks to these employees, thereby graying the structured lines of responsibility. As these lines shrink, organizations become vulnerable to violations of employee civil rights. As part of a review of the Vance v. Ball State (2013) of the Supreme Court, we examine Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and whether employers can be held vicariously liable for subordinate actions when they are not directly involved in the creation of a hostile work environment. We'll review the case's journey to the Supreme Court, analyzing the Court's reasons for ruling that Ball State University was not vicariously liable for the allegedly hostile work environment of Vance and discuss the impact of this decision on human resources managers. In 2006, Maetta Vance filed a lawsuit. a lawsuit against Ball State University in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. Ms. Vance, an African-American woman, claimed that Ball State University was responsible for a co-worker creating a hostile work environment. Ms. Vance worked for Ball State University as a dining assistant and served that department since 1989. She was promoted in 1991 from substitute server to part-time dining assistant, and again...... middle of paper.... ..o be held vicariously liable. Finally, we discussed the implications this decision presents for human resource managers in identifying and training subordinates to progress into leadership roles and ensuring that ongoing harassment training takes place to mitigate the liability risk.ReferencesMemorandum of the Society for Human Resource Management and the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources as Amici Curiae, p. 20, Vance v. Ball State University, 570 US ___ (2013). Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth. 524 U.S. 742. (1998). Civil Rights Act of 1964 § 7, 42 USC §2000e et seq. (1964). Retrieved from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm.Far¬agher v. Boca Raton. 524 U.S. 775. (1998). Vance v. Ball State University. Underpants review. 570 United States. ___. (2013).