Question : Union and Management disagree on the appropriate enforcement of the g

Question

Question: Union and Management disagree on the appropriate enforcement of the grooming standards. In this case study, you will be assuming the role of an arbitrator, in your opinion, who should “win” this arbitration? If you determine that the organization did or did not enforce the grooming standards appropriately, you should recommend that the union prevail in the arbitration and How did the fact that male ramp agents and male maintenance employees have different grooming standards factor into your decision? and also summarize the whole content.

Case Study: Ramp agents of Southwest Airlines load and unload baggage from aircraft and also collect baggage from customers as they board the aircraft. The union states that Grievant B, a ramp agent with 13 years of experience, is being discriminated against because management at its Love Field Operation in Dallas, Texas, requires him to wear his long hair tucked beneath a cap, but female ramp agents and male maintenance employees are not required to wear caps. At an arbitration hearing, the company testified that its grooming rules have been enforced on a uniform basis. All male ramp agents have been treated the same, and all female ramp agents have been treated the same. The company argues that discrimination is permissible as long as it is not unlawful and as long as differences in grooming standards that do not unreasonably inhibit work opportunities are permissible under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The company also states that the issue of an alleged discrimination with respect to male maintenance employees is beyond the scope of this grievance because a separate labor agreement exists between maintenance employees and the company.

Explanation / Answer

In this condition company should win this arbitration as in forcing the employees to follow the code of conduct or taking the long hair we need the cap is not any sort of discrimination for any employee. As long as the specific process does not harm any personal or religious as well as ethical believe and formation of the contract is already exist between maintenance employees and the company, treating this specific process as a discrimination is not appropriate. As it is a specific type of enforcement is done on all the employees evenly and does not discriminate any specific individual inside the organisation there is no case of targeted discrimination.
Maintenance employees does have a freedom according to their agreement with the company which is not necessarily enforceable for providing a uniform code of conduct where covering the hair under the cap is necessary. As the company is not enforcing this type of uniform provision at only one specific place. Comparing it to the females is not an option as female ramp agents are also following the specific uniform code of conduct implemented by the organisation and does not possess any kind of thread or unreasonably inhibiting the work opportunities which are permissible under the act of 1964 civil rights.
As of this situation mail ramp agents as well as male maintenance employee have a two different working platforms where male maintenance employees does not have any customer interaction but they work in background, usually dress code enforcement is done with the people who are directly in contact with the customer such as in case the ramp agents. As we can already see that the separate contract is also present between the mail maintenance employees and the company which provides additional support to the claim of the company of having an authority to maintain the dress code separately from the ramp agents.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse Q
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.