Case Study Analysis
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
HRM/552 Organizational Training and Development
MBAX1CGU82
Sherri Johnson
Workshop 2
May 26, 2014

Case Study Analysis

The purpose of this paper is to review and select the case studies in Ch. 2 of Human Resource Management. The author will explain and summarize University of California Regents vs. Bakke case summary, the court’s ruling, how the court’s ruling may possibly impact the organization and for businesses in general, legal precedence the ruling sets for most businesses, and the role the federal enforcement agency plays in ensuring the organization’s compliance to regulation standards.

Case Summary The University of California at Davis developed and implemented a special admissions program to increase enrollment of “disadvantaged” applicants, which meant minority students. The number of minority students increased. The special admissions goal was to fill 16 of the 100 positions with “disadvantaged” applicants whom would be selected by a special admissions committee. Allan Bakke, a Caucasian male, was denied admission to the school twice. Bakke brought a suit against the university on the grounds of Civil Rights Act violation and reverse discrimination, alleging preferential treatment of one group (minority or female) over another group opposed to equal opportunity (Byars & Rue, 2008).

Court’s ruling The Supreme Court ruled in a five-to-four decision in favor of Allan Bakke and deemed the schools admissions system to be illegal. However, by another five-to-four vote, the Court held that at least some forms of race-conscious admissions procedures are constitutional. the Court stated that race or ethnic background may be deemed a plus in particular applicant’s file, but it does not insulate the individual from comparison with all other candidates for the available positions. The decisions in this case provided an environment for further court tests of the legal status of reverse discrimination (Byars & Rue, 2008).

What this means for the organization and for businesses in general Racial discrimination is a major issue in the workplace. The school being charged with discrimination displays a negative image on the school. This may result in more allegations of discrimination. Businesses charged with discrimination face legal costs, such as attorney and court fees, state and federal penalties and fines, possible imprisonment, award and compensate punitive monetary damages for mental anguish, emotional and pain suffering, and other legal costs. This charge may result in a decrease in registrants, which result in lower stock and shareholder stakes. The school can lose shareholders, investors, credentials, and its business.

What legal precedence the ruling sets for most businesses? Court rulings states it is a company's responsibility not to discriminate based on race prior, during, and after hiring an individual. Additionally, if companies ask unacceptable questions designed to screen for ethnicity, age, race, etc., or if pre-employment screening is determined to be discriminatory, the company will be held accountable and liable for discrimination (Reference for Business, 2014). This ruling sets an example to businesses to comply with both state and federal laws and regulations, otherwise; suffer the consequences. Legal precedence the ruling sets for most businesses is to help ensure organizations comply with state and federal laws and regulations and are punished if organizations do not comply.

The role the federal enforcement agency plays in ensuring the organization’s compliance to regulation standards The role of federal enforcement agencies in the workplace is to ensure that civil rights are being maintained. There should not be any discrimination of any kind. According to the workplace fairness, 2014, federal agencies are responsible for issuing public service announcements to discourage discrimination or denial of equal protection laws; Appraising Federal laws and policies with respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice; Evaluate and gather information relating to discrimination; investigating complaints alleging that citizens rights are being violated; and submit discoveries, reports, and recommendations to the President and Congress (Workplacefairness, 2014). The federal government discourages and prevents discrimination in the workplace. There are numerous laws and regulations that govern the workplace. The most important laws regarding discrimination in the workplace is Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964, which strictly prohibits discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, national origin, age, sex, etc. in the workplace and The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (Reference for Business, 2014).

Conclusion
Discrimination will negatively impact an organizations including creating a corrupt workplace and infrastructure, expensive lawsuits, and public humiliation and embarrassment. Organizations should take steps in preventing discrimination in the workplace by providing and implementing workshops and training sessions on employment laws, training on discrimination and diversity in the workplace, and implementing and practicing strict new rules against discrimination. Federal enforcement agencies are essential in maintaining commitment and consistency with federal regulations.

References
Byars, L. L., & Rue, L. W. (2008). Human Resource Management (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc..
Corporate Compliance Insights. (2014). The HR Function’s Compliance Role. Retrieved from http://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/hr-function-compliance-role/
Reference for Business. (2014). Racial Discrimination. Retrieved from http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/small/Qu-Sm/Racial-Discrimination.html
Workplacefairness. (2014). Federal Agencies. Retrieved from http://www.workplacefairness.org/federalagencies