The dilemma for responsible companies is how to guarantee an application of the maximum anti-discrimination standards all through their functions so that all of theirs workers can have the benefit of the same level of security in spite of their ethnic setting, gender, differences, or country location.
In 2007, the ILO reported that discrimination is a worldwide occurrence that “bars individuals from some careers, refutes them a job or does not pay them according to their merit because of the race, sex, or social background.” Ethnicity is given a wide explanation to include a range of entity characteristics, including race, tribe, and belief among others.
Diversity and fairness regulations are well-established so that multi-national companies (MNCs) have a strong enticement to establish detailed policies and measures to reduce the jeopardy of prejudice against ethnic minorities in most places. Customary societal standards, the availability of domestic company safeguards, and the risk of lawful penalty at an individual level have assisted in engendering of relatively moderate workplace customs, whereby discrimination may not be seen in the first place. The safety of minorities is not likely to be much of a dilemma for the company.
Nevertheless, the availability of MNCs in growing economies where some represent social, political and traditional framework, elevates new challenges as a way of ensuring their workers’ experience de facto equality. Although most companies will have significant group of policies and measures that forbid discrimination, the real execution of these values will not be simple, straightforward, or without harmful consequences.
This research was based on insurance company where the study indicates that people with some medical conditions are the most affected in the act of discrimination because the insurance companies may not issue policies to them. Some fears are unfound, since only specific kinds of insurance can lawfully be denied. Even for some other forms of insurance, companies must give good reason for their decisions in case the anti-discrimination legislation challenged them.
The studies reveal that in certain circumstances, insurance companies can lawfully discriminate against individuals. The federal legislation admits the nature of live annuity insurance as a way of charitable reciprocally rated insurance, which involves distinguishing between applicants basing on their health status. Disability DiscriminationAct1992 (Cth), section 46 , for example, says that an insurance company providing life or annuity insurance can legally discriminate based on future health dangers, if the discrimination is “ taken from statistical data” and the discrimination is logical. The insurance company can prove this if an individual launch a formal complaint.
Insurance companies have the dilemma with discrimination since they want to satisfy their customers and employees but due to unavoidable circumstances, they end in dilemma. It was found that most of those who are discriminated by the insurance companies are women. One of the respondents complained that she had been discriminated against because she was denied loan insurance for revealing on the application that she had been medicated for melanoma. She said that the tumor was removed many years ago without reappearance of spread. Another complained that she had been denied life insurance because of her family disease history, though her genetics tested negative.
The experiential literature states that employers in the companies and service sectors frequently act as if customers discriminate, though the facts of customer discrimination is assorted. The research also found that in workplace, either in insurance company or any other company, it negatively affects the company, since the discriminatory regulations can hurt the reputation of the company. The study reveals that there is direct correlation between loyalty and discrimination. If employees feel that they have been wronged, they look for new jobs.
Workplace discrimination is a relentless world challenge. Employees who have been discriminated are likely to send wrong signals to potential clients. This leads to conflict in the way that customers can easily recognize when employees do not trust their company. Although there are policies that have been implemented to promote gender equality in the company, the study found that discrimination is still rampant. It is clear that women are still discriminated in terms of income and employment rate.
In most studies, demographics are associated with other characteristics of the workplace or job. The workplaces however, reveal little of this difference. Each workplace has least local prudence, as each must employ the detailed regulations set by company headquarters. Professional structure, internal chain of command, fringe profit, and job content are, for the most part, centrally set and uniformly implemented. Salary does not vary significantly with the ethnic composition of the workforce. Prices do not vary with the ethnic composition of the society. The employer enforces few hiring fundamentals. Educational necessities are minimal, and educational achievement varies little. Company consistency extends well passed HR policy. Advertisement, product fitting, and price policy are all indispensable factors that promote uniformity. The employer’s objective is that consumers and workers interpret workplaces in different positions as fundamentally compatible. This regularity reduces possible stuns between demographics and omitted job, product, or company distinctiveness (Leonard, Levine & Giuliano, 2009).
The company has placed several measures in order to eliminate discrimination which leads the company to dilemma in their company. In order to avoid workplace discrimination, the company has established no-tolerance policy in regard to harassment. This policy is written and every employee is required to read. Each employee should sign a form, which indicates that he has been given the copy of the policy. There are also procedures to follow when filing complaints. It outlines whom the complaints are made to and how they shall be heard. Finally, the employees are given discussion about anti-discrimination policy in detail. Generally, these measures are contributed to great improvement in eliminating dilemma that the company has had with discrimination.