(Name of the Instructor)
Michael Robert`s case involves racial discrimination. This is against the Equality Act 2010 which protects employees from discrimination because of race, ethnicity, color or nationality (Guerin & DelPo, 2013). In the span of three months Robert was not even contacted nor given a chance for interview. He was an African American driver having more than five years driving experience whereas other applicants all whites with less than four years experience were hired for the job. In respect to McDonnell-Douglas test, there is enough evidence from the complainant that he was discriminated on racial basis, whereas the employer cannot prove otherwise (Guerin & DelPo, 2013). As a judge therefore I would rule in favor of the plaintiff.
The case of disparate impact occurs when a group of people belonging to one group are discriminated in the work place. According to the 4/5[th] rule, the African Americans have a case of disparate impact. This is because, although the persons went through the same test and interview and had equal chance of selection the final decision on who would be hired was left at the hands of the employer. To prove there was no case of disparate impact the employer could have produced the list of applicant and their qualifications and selection criteria (Guerin & DelPo, 2013).
Disability is physical impairment which prevents someone from performing major life activities as defined in the ADA. ADAAA protects every person from discrimination due to disability which may include morbid obesity. Sue Papas was unable to perform major life activities due to obesity which according ADAAA may be regarded as a disability (Guerin & DelPo, 2013). The employer unlawfully denied Papas the job on basis of her disability. In addition, Papas had enough proof that he was discriminated due to inability to perform major life activities. Hence as a judge I would rule in favor of the plaintiff.
Guerin, L. & DelPo, A. (2013). The essential guide to federal employment laws. Berkeley, California: Nolo.