2 THESIS STATEMENT
In order to provide equal opportunity to all in employment, organizations should ensure their recruitment strategy is inclusive of persons from every race, creed, gender, religion, not limited to the disabled, because The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces Federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. These laws protect employees and job applicants against employment discrimination.
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
While recruiting to increase inclusion and diversity might be a noble goal, however, an organization that is ill-prepared to adopt an inclusive culture in hiring and acclimation can be an expensive and harrowing path to a short-tenured employee. According to the Gallup Organization, 45% of U.S. workers have experienced some form of discrimination in the past 12 months . It has been found that decisions made and executed by diverse and inclusive teams delivered 60% better results  Inclusive teams make better business decisions up to 87% of the time. Id. Armed with this understanding, inclusion and diversity is not always about ethnicity, disability, or gender. Certainly, viewpoints have shifted over the course of time, but there continues to be unfairness in hiring that is not too often focused on, which is age discrimination. The age-old question, no pun intended, is why so many persons aged 40 and up experience issues in the job search, when they often bring a wealth of experience and other valuable skills? There are a number of stereotypes that permeated such as learning curve with technology, higher compensation, stamina, and even lack of flexibility, all of which are untrue a majority of the time. It is these dangerous and misguided assumptions that prevent hiring managers from seeing the “plug and play” value in seasoned professional who need very little hand holding and is reliable.
The Legal Doctrine Regarding EEOC Compliance
Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the law that accomplished enforcement of the constitutional right to vote, but to also provide jurisdiction to the US district courts to give relief due to discrimination in public places, and protect the God given constitutional rights as well in public education and other federal subsidized programs against discrimination. The EEOC was created to enforce this Act to prevent discrimination in employment.
Historical Background EEOC Laws
Under the oversight of the US Department of Justice, the commission known as the Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was created to combat various forms of discrimination in the workplace, as a part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with limited scope of power to actually make employers accountable for such unfair practices.
It took eight-years for significant change, when the 92nd Congress provided the EEOC power to sue employers, which gave the agency an opportunity to effectively hold violators accountable. Since the early 70’s the EEOC has stayed the course in taking aggressive actions in thoroughly investigating alleged employers who have been accused of acts of discrimination in
3 THESIS STATEMENT
their hiring and or treatment in the workplace, with success even at the US Supreme Court level. The EECO is not exclusive to suing companies, it is also responsible for informing both the public and employers about discriminatory practices.
As defined by the EEOC, “to discriminate” is to treat that person differently, or less favorably, for some reason. The act of discrimination takes hold when an employer effectively causes a disadvantage to a potential candidate for hire or a current employee based on any of the following; age, gender, race, religion or disability to mention only a few, which none of these characteristics would hinder ones ability to meet the minimum requirements or perform the roles and responsibilities of their job. unless you have a bona fide reason, such as a DOT driver would need to be able to have vision to perform the work, and a disability of sight impairment/blindness.
At the heart of the EEOC, the initial focus was largely on racial discrimination with landmark cases such as Griggs v Duke Power Co. that was decided at the US Supreme Court that paved the way for what is known as disparate treatment.  Throughout the years the EEOC has since evolved to include other areas of discrimination such as protections for pregnant women and for persons over the age of 40, which is the focus of this thesis.
The importance of this agency from its beginning in the crux of social change and violent unrest was a clarion call for justice and equality. In the early 80’s political pressure was applied and the EEOC who once had a great number of “large class” cases, began to scale back cases for individuals and handle these complainants at the local level.
By the early 90’s the EEOC began to enforce the AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 (ADA) signed into law by President G.H. Bush on July 26, 1990. This new legislation provided yet another avenue for the EEOC to make employers accountable in regard to their hiring standards and practices, as well as being a resource to further educate about discrimination as it effects the workplace.
Cases, Regulations and Statues Related to the EEOC
Dealing with the realities of ageism in the workplace and ingrained in corporate culture and hiring practices, age discrimination is an inconvenient and disturbing truth. The ADEA prohibits employment discrimination against persons 40 years of age or older. THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1967, 
Roughly two-thirds of workers in the US between the age of 40-70, have witnessed or experienced themselves some form of ageism in the workplace. The risks are even higher for ageism should you work in an industry such as “big-tech” or “entertainment” sector.
The federal government had its own recent challenge in the US Supreme Court case of Babb v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs when Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion with Justice Thomas, the only one dissenting in a recent case of age discrimination.
Noris Babb, worked for the VA Medical Center located in Bay Pines, FL for 16 years as a clinical pharmacist. During her tenure she considered to be a high-performing employee who was certified to practice disease management, having a case load of patients and wrote scripts as well without an attending physician based on the attorney of the plaintiff. However, Babb
4 THESIS STATEMENT
contends that 10 years earlier she and other colleagues began to notice a pattern of being passed over for advance positions with higher compensations, which were being filled by a majority of men in their early 30’s. Babb and her colleagues were all 45 years old or greater.  In the end, the US Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision ruled in favor of Babb and the EEOC, that the federal law protects even federal employees from age discrimination, and that Congress had purposefully extended more protection to federal employees versus employees in the private sector, local and state level agencies. Id.
A recent settlement was reached in another EEOC age discrimination case against Burrow Global Services, LLC based in Houston, is an engineering and construction firm serving the petrochemical sector. The plaintiff in this case claimed that they were terminated based on his age.
Based on the suit filed, the plaintiff was a senior electrical designer, greater than 60 years of age and newly managed by an individual much younger. According to the suit, “Almost immediately, the new supervisor began making comments about retirement and repeatedly asking the employee when he planned to retire” The EEOC in their suit on behalf of the plaintiff charged that the new manager then decided to terminate the plaintiff and preceded to hire someone much younger as a backfill. Id.
The alleged conduct of the manager at Burrow Global Services, LLC is a direct violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), that prohibits discrimination on the basis of age. Id. The EEOC initially tried to resolve this matter through the process of administrative conciliation, however when that effort failed it was then filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Id.
On March 26, 2021, under a 3-year consent decree, the respondent will pay the plaintiff the amount of $50,960 in back compensation and damages, plus roll out training regarding the law and policies related to the ADEA. Id. One of many examples of discriminatory practices in regard to age.
Review of Standing Literature and Scholarship on the EEOC
According to the Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal, Why the EEOC (Still) Matter, it covers the bold but empty beginnings of the agency having started on July 2, 1965, in an office that was repurposed by the Department of Commerce, and honestly having no real span of control or power to enforce any part of Title VII. 
Under the Civil Rights Act the onslaught of legislative wrangling that it was born from, gave authority to the EEOC to do several things such as investigate and conciliate discrimination charges, conduct technical studies and assistance, but fell short of the ability to sue employers who are in violation of the law. Basically, no real accountability at this point. However, their authoritative reach to be able to sue came years later in 1972, giving the EEOC the power to not only investigate but sue employers as well. Id.
It is evident that forms of discrimination will always remain because you are dealing with the most complexed of creation, and that is a human. It is evident that the various forms of
5 THESIS STATEMENT
employment discrimination is alive and well across every sector or enterprise in the US workforce. Year over year, claims of racial, ageism, disability, and or gender discrimination floods the agencies by the tens of thousands. It begs the question, are we taking the right approach or are we missing something in this fight for equality in the workplace? As complaints are on the rise, we are approaching 60 years of this legislation, and are we even better for it right now? A large majority of claims are closed without further consideration or for administrative reasons, upwards to 80% of the initial complaints. The fact remains, that the “EEOC is the only federal agency responsible for receiving and processing charges of unlawful employment discrimination – and the only agency responsible for investigating these complaints and conciliating them.” Id.
The EEOC plays a key role in providing a vital public service by monitoring and measuring the number of complaints year over year, identifying the types of complaints, performing data analysis and uses this data to understand the trends in each category of discrimination practices that tend to permeate within the workplace.
Although a lengthy process, it is necessary to thoroughly investigate these complaints as they are highly charged and of great seriousness. When an individual decides to level a charge or complaint against a company, it is not taken lightly and there are times when other events have failed to be reported. Id. The EEOC is an agency who serves on behalf of the public interest, that maintains the goal of eradicating discriminatory practices in hiring and within the workforce. Instead,”[w]hen the EEOC acts, albeit at the behest of and for the benefit of specific individuals, it acts also to vindicate the public interest in preventing employment discrimination.” 
The Overall View of the Debate
The employee is the lifeblood to every business, as you cannot serve your customers or clients without them. Employees come from various walks of life, armed with diverse skills and experiences that improves productivity which translates to the bottom-line. The purpose of the EEOC is to ensure that employers are treating every candidate who meet the minimum requirements of the role fairly in the hiring process as well as current employees within the workforce.
If someone lacks the skills to perform a job they applied for, then yes the employer has the right to decline the candidate based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities. For example, if a position requires a degree in Accounting and five years of experience, and the applicant has no college degree and no experience, this candidate is unqualified. The focus for the EEOC is to reduce and educate the public concerning the laws in place on workplace and hiring discrimination.
Age discrimination, which is more prevalent than ever before, is also about when employers are posting jobs that indicate an age range or targeting a particular group for example “18-25” or “New College Grad” are ways to target younger candidates but also discriminating against candidates who are 40 years and older. Structural biases in promotions are also ways to discriminate, against older workers as well.
6 THESIS STATEMENT
Biblical Worldview Application of the Debate
7 THESIS STATEMENT
 EMPLOYERS (July 18, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/employers
 BUILD A CULTURE WHERE EVERY EMPLOYEE CAN USE THEIR VOICE, https://www.gallup.com/workplace/215939/diversity-inclusion.aspx
 ERIC LARSON, NEW RESEARCH: DIVERSITY + INCLUSION = BETTER DECISION MAKING AT WORK (2017), https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriklarson/2017/09/21/new-research-diversity- inclusion-better-decision-making-at-work/#6459bbc4cbfa
 WHAT IS EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION (Aug. 7, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/youth/what- employment-discrimination
 GRIGGS V DUKE POWER CO., https://www.britannica.com/event/Griggs-v-Duke-Power-Co ( Aug. 7, 2021)
 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/ada ( Aug. 7, 2021)
 THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1967, https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/age- discrimination-employment-act-1967?_ga=2.269248819.310187299.1628479248- 1075987091.1628479247 ( Aug. 7, 2021)
 BABB V. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, S. CT. (2020) (, J., CONCURRING)
 Nina Totenberg , SUPREME COURT HANDS FEDERAL WORKER MAJOR WIN IN AGE DISCRIMINATION CASE, https://www.npr.org/2020/04/06/828052688/supreme-court-hands- federal-worker-partial-win-in-age-discrimination-case ( Apr. 6, 2020)
 BURROW GLOBAL TO PAY $50,960 TO SETTLE EEOC AGE DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT, https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/burrow-global-pay-50960-settle-eeoc-age-discrimination- lawsuit ( Mar. 29, 2021)
 Anne Noel Occhialino & Daniel Vaile , WHY THE EEOC (STILL) MATTER, https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=hlelj (last visited )
 GENERAL TELEPHONE, 446 U.S. AT 326.