QUESTION 17 Employer had an opening in a sales job that covers a large territory
ID: 461780 • Letter: Q
Question
QUESTION 17 Employer had an opening in a sales job that covers a large territory and required extensive travel by car and thus required some 55—65 hours per week. Its position announcements included the requirements for the job. Employer had both male and female applicants and granted interviews to the top five, four of whom were male and one of whom was female. Prior to the interviews, the female had been rated as the leading candidate. During the interviews, Employer asked each applicant about his or her availability to do the travel and put in the time required by the job. The female responded that she had two children of elementary school age that she was home-schooling and so could not spend that much time at the job, especially traveling, but that she could comfortably commit to 40 to 45 hours per week. When asked why she applied for the job when she was not willing to work the hours required, she responded that she felt that much of the travel was unnecessary and that many matters could be taken care of by phone, by e-mail and by texting. Because of her answers to these two questions, she was eliminated from consideration for the job. An unmarried male with no children with less sales experience was awarded the position because he said he could and would do all the traveling and work all the hours required by the job. Has employer violated Title VII’s prohibitions against sex discrimination? Assume the same facts as #17 above. Plaintiff ultimately commences a civil action against employer for sex discrimination. Her complaint alleges that she is a female, that she applied for a job for which she was qualified, that she was not hired and that the job was awarded to a male who had the same or lesser qualifications. Are Plaintiff’s allegations sufficient to create a prima facie case of discrimination to which Defendant must respond? a.Yes. b.No.
Explanation / Answer
Answer:
If we see the allegation that plaintiff have made on the defendant then on the first instance it seems that she has been a victim of sex discrimination. However, while filing her plaint, the plaintiff have suppressed the correct facts and the true details of her interview. She was not eliminated because she is a female but because she could not fit in the basic and key job requirements.
On account of suppression of facts one can say that plaintiff's allegations may create a prima facie case of discrimination which the defendant must respond with the facts and correct details.
The correct answer is Option a. Yes.
However, the defendant may not be pronounced guilty once the facts are produced before the authorities.