Deck 7: National Origin Discrimination

Question 1

An employee may have a national origin discrimination claim if the worker is simply perceived to be of a certain origin,even if the individual is not,in fact,of that origin.

Answer 1

True
Explanation:In addition to national origin encompassing an employee's place of birth, it also includes ethnic characteristics or origins, as well as physical, linguistic, or cultural traits closely associated with a national origin group. It also may serve as the basis for a national origin discrimination claim if an employee is perceived by an employer to be a member of a particular national origin group, whether or not the individual is in fact of that origin.

Question 2

The Fair Labor Standards Act protects undocumented workers from abuse at workplaces.

Answer 2

True
Explanation:The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) set forth that employers' liability for monetary remedies irrespective of a worker's unauthorized status promotes the goal of deterring unlawful discrimination without undermining the purposes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). The Fair Labor Standards Act also protects undocumented workers from abuse.

Question 3

Nesbitt hires Francois,an alien working in the United States with the legal authority to do so.One month later,Francois loses his right to work in the United States.Which of the following holds true in this case?

A) Nesbitt's continued employment of Francois cannot constitute a violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) under any circumstance.
B) Nesbitt's continued employment of Francois will constitute national origin discrimination against individuals with American citizenship.
C) Nesbitt's continued employment of Francois will constitute a violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) if Nesbitt knows that Francois has become an unauthorized alien.
D) Nesbitt's continued employment of Francois is not unlawful because it is an unfair immigration-related practice for a person to discriminate against any individual based on their national origin.

Answer 3

C
Explanation:Nesbitt's continued employment of Francois will constitute a violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) if Nesbitt knows that Francois is now an unauthorized alien. It is unlawful for a person or other entity, after hiring an alien for employment, to continue to employ the alien in the United States knowing the alien is (or had become) an unauthorized alien with respect to such employment.

Question 4

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)has established only civil penalties and no criminal penalties for hiring illegal aliens.

Question 5

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,legal aliens are permitted access to certain government and other positions by statute.

Question 6

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)prohibits discrimination against legal aliens in favor of U.S.citizens.

Question 7

Himiona,who belongs to the Maori tribe,aspires to be a deputy sheriff in Outer Maple Grove County.Himiona sports a small moko tattoo across his cheeks and nose as a symbol of his heritage.Per the dress code,however,sheriffs are not allowed to have any visible tattoos.Himiona is told that he will need to remove his tattoo before he can apply to be a deputy sheriff.Which of the following will hold true in this scenario?

A) Himiona will prevail in a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because his tattoo honors his heritage.
B) Outer Maple Grove County can defend itself against Himiona's claim because a dress code is permissible under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
C) Outer Maple Grove County can defend itself against Himiona's claim if it can be shown that the tattoo overlaps with his religion.
D) Himiona will prevail in a national origin discrimination claim if he uses the bona fide occupational qualification defense to show that his tattoo does not disrupt the dress code.

Question 8

Henri,who runs a French restaurant,wants his diners to have an authentic culinary experience.Thus,he wants to recruit qualified individuals of French origin for his restaurant.Henri can avoid a claim of national origin discrimination and still limit the job to individuals of French origin by showing that:

A) an applicant's ability to speak fluent French and understand French cuisine are bona fide occupational qualifications.
B) U.S citizens view people with French ancestry as exotic.
C) it is difficult for people with French ancestry to be employed in other jobs.
D) the Civil Rights Act of 1964 allows employers to discriminate against employees or applicants on the basis of their national origin without any legitimate cause.

Question 9

Smith,the manager of a manufacturing unit,issues a written workplace policy stating that any employee who is related to people of Latin American origin will be ineligible for a promotion to the supervisory level.This workplace policy issued by Smith:

A) does not violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it has been explicitly stated by Smith in writing and hence is not arbitrary.
B) violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it will result in discrimination against individuals who are married to or associated with people of a specific national origin.
C) does not violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because its outcome is not triggered by the national origin of the individuals it affects.
D) violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because the act provides protection against discrimination based on country of citizenship.

Question 10

Thomas hires an alien worker named Desai to work for his firm.Before being employed,Desai is required to produce the statutorily required documents demonstrating his right to work in the United States.However,because of Desai's qualifications and the cost benefits Thomas's company will incur if he is hired,Thomas decides to employ Desai without asking him to provide the necessary documents.Which of the following holds true in this case?

A) Thomas cannot be held liable for unlawful employment practice because he can establish an affirmative defense by showing that Desai's documents were not verified for a legitimate reason.
B) Thomas cannot be held liable as it is an unfair immigration-related practice for a person or other entity to verify if an individual is an authorized alien or an illegal immigrant.
C) Thomas can be held liable under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 for employing an individual without verifying his or her employment eligibility.
D) Thomas can be held liable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only if Desai has any criminal lawsuits filed against him.

Question 11

If an employee is consistently subject to harassment based on national origin but never informs his or her employer,the employer may still be liable for not being aware.

Question 12

Chuntao,an employee of Chinese origin,works as a sales representative at Arcade Recyclers International.Her supervisor,Jim,persistently refers to her as "Charlene" instead of "Chuntao." Although she objects and asks to be called by her rightful name,Jim continues to call her "Charlene" for over a year and justifies his actions by saying that an American-sounding name would increase her chances of success and would be more acceptable to Arcade's clientele.Chuntao brings a complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.Which of the following holds true in this case?

A) Arcade Recyclers International will not be liable to Chuntao because the use of "Charlene" is neither a racial epithet nor a description of her physical ethnic traits.
B) Arcade Recyclers International will be liable to Chuntao because ethnic characteristics go beyond skin color and other physical traits and can include names.
C) Arcade Recyclers International will not be liable to Chuntao because Jim did not intend his use of "Charlene" to be derogatory of her national origin.
D) Arcade Recyclers International will be liable to Chuntao because Title VII provides protection against discrimination based on a victim's country of citizenship.

Question 13

In the case of Garcia v.Spun Steak Co.,the court followed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC)guidelines and held that the English-only rule in the workplace violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Question 14

Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act's (IRCA)anti-discrimination provisions,employers with 4 to 14 employees are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of national origin.

Question 15

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)created a special classification,"Code Z," to designate complaints from undocumented workers regarding workplace abuses.

Question 16

Discrimination based upon citizenship status,or "alienage," is prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Question 17

The right to speak one's native language when the employee is bilingual is not an immutable characteristic that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects.

Question 18

Melanie,a white female employed at The Office Corner for three months,is married to Muhammad,who is of Middle Eastern descent.Melanie has been subjected to verbal abuse almost every day ever since her co-workers became aware of her husband's ethnicity.She has been called a "traitor" and a "terrorist." Her co-workers refuse to work with her,and her supervisor has condoned this behavior by assigning her tasks in the stockroom when previously,she assisted customers in the electronics department.Which of the following holds true in this scenario?

A) Melanie does not have a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because she is not a member of a protected class.
B) Melanie does have a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because she is being harassed based on the national origin of her husband.
C) Melanie does not have a national origin discrimination claim because she has only been employed for three months.
D) Melanie does have a discrimination claim based on race only if she is a citizen of the United States.

Question 19

The discharge of a teacher from her services is upheld when,although fluent in English,she spoke with such a thick accent that her students found it difficult to follow her.

Question 20

Margaret comes to work in clothes that are highly reflective of her national origin.This happens to violate the dress code of her workplace.After being politely asked to follow the office dress code several times by her supervisor,Margaret is finally asked to return home and change into clothing that conforms to the company's dress code.Which of the following holds true if Margaret decides to file a discrimination claim based on national origin?

A) Margaret has a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for national origin discrimination because it guarantees her the right to freedom of cultural expression.
B) The employer can defend the dress code if it can show that Margaret's attire overlaps with her religion.
C) Margaret's employer can defend the dress code because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not require an employer to accommodate an employee's attire of national origin.
D) Margaret has a claim under Title VII the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for national origin discrimination if she can prove that her attire does not encourage other employees to dress casually.

Question 21

If an employer enforces an English-only policy in all areas of the workplace and at all times,including break times and other free time,the:

A) employer's policy is presumptively discriminatory according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
B) employer is much safer from a charge of national origin discrimination than an employer who only enforces the policy in certain areas and at certain times.
C) employer impermissibly violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which protects the ability of workers to express their cultural heritage at the workplace.
D) employer's policy is not unlawful because all individuals, irrespective of their national origin, are required to speak English in the United States.

Question 22

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)prohibits:

A) discrimination claims against employers with 4 to 14 employees.
B) employers from enacting a preference for U.S. citizens if the job applicants are all equally qualified.
C) discrimination in favor of U.S. citizens as against legal aliens under all circumstances.
D) employers from hiring those not legally authorized for employment in the United States.

Question 23

To claim a prima facie case for national origin discrimination,an employee needs to prove that:

A) his or her employer's employment decision caused an adverse employment action to him or her.
B) his or her position was filled by someone who is a member of the same protected class that he or she belongs to.
C) his or her employer's employment decision or action was a business necessity.
D) his or her employer's job requirements exceed his or her qualifications.

Question 24

Phillip is a paying resident at the Serene Senior Center.He is often seen making ethnic slurs at Lastri,an Indonesian employee.He also refuses to be served or helped by her and others of the same national origin as Lastri.Sometimes,he even complains to the other residents that Lastri is not qualified for her job and needs to be replaced.Lastri reports this to her supervisor but is asked to ignore Phillip because he is just a strange old man.Lastri files a complaint of national origin discrimination.Which of the following holds true in this scenario?

A) Serene Senior Center is not liable to Lastri because the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) allows employers to discriminate in favor of U.S. citizens.
B) Serene Senior Center is liable to Lastri because it took no action to stop the harassment.
C) Serene Senior Center is liable to Lastri because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides protection against discrimination based on country of citizenship.
D) Serene Senior Center is not liable to Lastri because her case does not involve any physical harassment.

Question 25

Which of the following is a difference between the treatment of discrimination based on national origin under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)?

A) The IRCA does not allow discrimination in favor of U.S. citizens as against legal aliens under any circumstances, whereas Title VII does.
B) The IRCA does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of citizenship under any circumstances, whereas Title VII does.
C) Under IRCA, only employers with 50 or more employees are covered, whereas Title VII covers all employers irrespective of their size.
D) Under the IRCA, innocent or negligent discrimination is a complete defense to a claim of discrimination, whereas under Title VII, it is not.

Question 26

Adjoa,a Ghanaian citizen with a master's degree in library science from the University of Ghana,applies for the post of a reference librarian at Rex State University in the United States.She is a permanent resident of the United States with authorization to work there and has eight years of experience as a chief librarian at a reputed university in South Africa.Theresa,an American citizen with a college degree in English and two years of experience as a library assistant,also applies for the same job.Although Adjoa seems more qualified for the job,the selecting officer hires Theresa based on a belief that Theresa will be a more stable employee because she is an American citizen.Which of the following holds true in this case?

A) Adjoa has no basis for a complaint under any act because Theresa is academically qualified for the job.
B) Adjoa has a basis for a complaint only under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because the act provides protection against discrimination based on country of citizenship under all circumstances.
C) Adjoa has no basis for a complaint because the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) allows employers to discriminate in favor of U.S. citizens.
D) Adjoa has a basis for a complaint only under the Immigration Reform and Control Act because she was denied the job based on her citizenship.

Question 27

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of citizenship when:

A) citizenship discrimination has the purpose or effect of national origin discrimination.
B) the victim is a citizen of a developed country.
C) the victim is an illegal alien in the United States.
D) citizenship discrimination is the only way to protect positions that are intimately related to the process of self-government.

Question 28

According to Garcia v.Spun Steak Co.,a facially neutral workplace policy will not cause a disparate impact with respect to a privilege of employment on the basis of national origin if the:

A) employer requires only a certain group of employees to adhere to the policy at all times.
B) policy is primarily meant to put only employees from a specific national origin group at a disadvantage.
C) affected employee can show that the policy is not a business necessity.
D) employer defines the privilege narrowly, if the policy is one that an affected employee can readily observe, and nonobservance is purely a matter of individual preference.

Question 29

In the context of Garcia v.Spun Steak Co.,the court:

A) stated that an English-only policy in the workplace will raise workplace standards even when English is not a bona fide necessity at the workplace.
B) decided that an English-only policy will be in violation of Title VII's (of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) protection of cultural heritage in the workplace.
C) rejected the arguments made by Spanish-speaking employees stating that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects the ability of workers to express their cultural heritage at the workplace.
D) concluded that the English-only policy as implemented and enforced was a tool by which discrimination based on national origin was effected.

Question 30

Luis has been employed as a quality officer for Slate Mountain Waterworks (SMW),a company with only 12 employees.He has more experience and better qualifications than Brett,who has also been working as a quality officer with SMW for the last three years.Both Luis and Brett apply for the job of chief quality officer within SMW,and Brett is hired for the position.Luis overhears his employer say that he would never promote a Mexican if he could give the job to a real American.Which of the following holds true in this scenario?

A) Luis can file a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil rights Act of 1964.
B) Luis can file a national origin discrimination claim under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).
C) Luis cannot file a national origin discrimination claim because he is still an employee at Slate Mountain Waterworks.
D) Luis cannot file a national origin discrimination claim because Slate Mountain Waterworks did not take any adverse employment action.

Question 31

Once an employee has articulated a prima facie case of discrimination based on national origin,the burden falls on his or her employer to:

A) identify a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ).
B) prove that there has been a violation of the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
C) establish that no other employee was subjected to such disparate treatment.
D) show that the employee belongs to a protected class.

Question 32

Carlos,a Mexican-American,is five feet five inches tall,which is the average height for Mexican-American men.He applies for a job as a mechanic with Moto Soul but is not hired as he does not meet the minimum height requirement for the position,which is five feet eight inches.If the height requirement cannot be justified by business necessity,which of the following will hold true in this scenario?

A) Carlos has a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if he can show that the height requirement adversely impacts Mexican-Americans.
B) Carlos has a national origin discrimination claim under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 because he is a member of a protected class.
C) Carlos does not have a national origin discrimination claim as long as he is a citizen of the United States.
D) Carlos does not have a national origin discrimination claim because Moto Soul applied the height requirement to all applicants.

Question 33

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,the prohibition against national origin discrimination is subject to the political function exception,which allows:

A) only a naturalized U.S. citizen to run for president of the United States.
B) only private employers to discriminate against individuals based on their country of origin.
C) discrimination against a noncitizen when the position is intimately related to the process of self-government.
D) discrimination against individuals whose national origin is a country with which trade has been outlawed by an act of Congress.

Question 34

Omar,an undocumented worker employed by Astra Manufacturing,is routinely harassed because of his Middle Eastern ancestry.His supervisors and co-workers often refer to him as a terrorist and call him "Taliban." He complains to the management about the harassment and after a few days,his supervisor conducts an investigation and finds out that Omar is an illegal alien.This information is relayed to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).Which of the following is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)most likely to conclude?

A) Astra Manufacturing is not liable because the Immigration Reform and Control Act does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of citizenship under any circumstances.
B) Omar has a claim of discrimination because the Immigration Reform and Control Act does not allow discrimination in favor of U.S. citizens as against illegal aliens.
C) Astra Manufacturing will be liable if the company acquired information on Omar's status through a retaliatory investigation.
D) Omar does not have a claim of discrimination because the Fair Labor Standards Act does not protect undocumented workers from abuse.

Question 35

Abdel applies for a job as a bus driver with the Overland Omnibus Corporation.Abdel's employer is worried that it might not be safe to allow someone of Middle Eastern descent to drive around a bus full of people.Therefore,Abdel is asked to submit to a more stringent background check than the other applicants.Which of the following is true of this case?

A) Abdel has no basis for a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because the act does not provide protection against discrimination based on country of citizenship under any circumstances.
B) Abdel has no basis for a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because Overland Omnibus Corporation is a private employer.
C) Abdel can bring a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because he was treated differently based on his ethnicity.
D) Abdel can bring a national origin discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because of the bona fide occupational qualification defense.

Question 36

Employers can avoid liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for national origin discrimination after implementing an English-only rule if they can show that the rule:

A) is necessary to maintain supervisory control of the workplace.
B) is used as a sole basis to promote employees within the workplace.
C) has been primarily used to help differentiate employees based on their national origin.
D) has to be followed by employees at all times.

Question 37

City Healthkeepers,a private hospital,employs five workers of Middle Eastern descent in its maintenance department.Though they were told that they would be performing different tasks on a rotation basis,the maintenance supervisor assigns only the five of them,out of the total 20 maintenance employees,to clean the morgue and the basement every time.Although they requested the hospital's management to change their duties,no changes were made.Which of the following holds true in this case?

A) City Healthkeepers will be liable for national origin discrimination because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides protection against discrimination based on country of citizenship.
B) City Healthkeepers will be liable for national origin discrimination because it illegally segregated the employees based on their national origin, resulting in disparate treatment.
C) City Healthkeepers will not be liable for national origin discrimination because the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) allows employers to discriminate in favor of U.S. citizens.
D) City Healthkeepers will not be liable for national origin discrimination based on the court's ruling in Garcia v. Spun Steak Co.

Question 38

Tang Li is employed by Open Box Corporation as a computer analyst.Once,in a fit of anger,Bob,his supervisor,told him that foreigners should stop seeking jobs in the United States if they cannot perform.Another time,Bob yelled at Tang,calling him an idiot.Which of the following holds true in this case?

A) Tang has a harassment claim based on national origin under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because he belongs to a protected racial class.
B) Tang does not have a harassment claim based on national origin because these two incidents, although offensive, do not create a hostile work environment.
C) Tang has a harassment claim based on national origin because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides protection against discrimination based on country of citizenship.
D) Tang does not have a harassment claim based on national origin because the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) allows employers to discriminate in favor of U.S. citizens.

Question 39

An employee must prove discriminatory intent in order to be successful with a national origin discrimination claim under:

A) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
B) the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
C) Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
D) the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

Question 40

Jin,an Asian male,is fired after being late for work three times.His employer has a rule that employees may be fired after being late for work twice.However,the rule has only been enforced against Asian workers while employees of other national origins have been retained with only a warning.In this scenario,Jin:

A) has a national origin discrimination claim based on disparate impact.
B) has a national origin discrimination claim based on disparate treatment.
C) has a discrimination claim if he uses the bona fide occupational qualification defense to show that his employer's actions were unlawful.
D) does not have a national origin discrimination claim because his employer was only trying to enforce a neutral policy.

Question 41

Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA),employers:

A) are required to verify the identity and authorization to work in the United States for all newly hired employees.
B) are prohibited from discriminating in favor of U.S. citizens as against legal aliens.
C) can be held liable for innocent or negligent discrimination.
D) can impose an employment rule on workers, such as the English-only rule, even if it is not a business necessity.

Question 42

Jing,a Chinese citizen who is legally permitted to work in the United States,and Sophia,a white American woman,apply for the same job at Golden Bird Enterprises.Jing loses the job to Sophia.In order to prevail in a national origin discrimination claim under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA),Jing must prove that:

A) the job is a business necessity for her.
B) she has been living in the United States for more than 20 years.
C) the employer has hired other Chinese employees.
D) she is more qualified for the job than Sophia.

Question 43

Kevin,the owner and manager of a large warehouse,speaks only English.He requires that all his employees speak English to ensure that communication related to work is clear and effective.A number of non-English-speaking workers complain about the policy on the grounds that they can converse in their native languages and still get the job done.If these non-English-speaking employees bring a claim of national origin discrimination on the basis of this policy,what is Kevin's best defense? Explain.

Question 44

Franklin,a U.S.-born individual of English ancestry,works for the China Soul Restaurant,which is owned and operated by two U.S.citizens of Chinese ancestry.Franklin's co-workers Jin Pan and Lou Jiang,also U.S.citizens of Chinese ancestry,are late for work almost every day,but no action is taken against them even though the owners are aware of Jin and Lou's tardiness.There is a clearly stated workplace policy that an employee reporting to work late more than once in a 60-day period will be dismissed.Franklin reports to work late twice,and he is dismissed.Explain whether Franklin has a basis for a national origin discrimination claim.

Question 45

Paku is an American of Indonesian ancestry who wants to work for Integrity Packers and Movers (IPM).Paku is well built and is trained in mixed martial arts.However,when he applies for a job at IPM,he is told that he is too short because all employees who work for the firm must be at least five feet seven inches tall.Paku,like most other individuals of the same ancestry,does not meet the height requirement.IPM is a family business run by Frank and his son Randy and employs a maximum of eight employees.Discuss whether Paku can bring a case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or another law.What does Paku have to prove to succeed?

Question 46

Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA),if an employee gains employment with false documentation but then later obtains proper work authorization,his or her employer:

A) must notify the Department of Homeland Security so that the employee can be prosecuted for perjury.
B) should correct the relevant information on the Employment Eligibility Verification form (Form 1-9).
C) should fire the employee for misconduct based on falsification of the employment application.
D) must notify the Immigration and Naturalization Service so that the employee can be deported.

Question 47

The term "green card" refers to a _____.

A) resident alien card that grants permanent residence in the United States
B) card usually provided by employers for the purpose of payroll management
C) card that holds details regarding employees' duration of employment
D) registration card issued by the federal government to all biracial citizens of the United States

Question 48

"Not all harassment is prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." Explain.

Question 49

Distinguish between national origin and citizenship.

Question 50

Which of the following is an employer's responsibility under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)?

A) Accepting a green card for the purposes of Form I-9
B) Storing Form I-9 records in employee personnel files
C) Making threats of reporting an employee to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in retaliation for discrimination complaints or other protected activity
D) Asking assistance from the Immigration and Naturalization Service when a document submitted by an employee or an applicant does not reasonably appear to be genuine