Question

May Gilbert began working for Amalgamated Baking Company (ABC) in May 2003 as a sales supervisor at its Vernon, California, facility. In May 2005, ABC promoted her to food sales account manager and in June 2006 promoted her again to conduct training for southern California distributors. Ken Weinzimmer, ABC's senior vice president for sales and marketing and/or Dwight Carnahan, ABC's president, approved each promotion.

ABC then offered Gilbert a job in Texas. She accepted the offer and in January 2007, with Carnahan's approval, began working as the first sales supervisor at ABC's Fort Worth, Texas, facility. ABC did not then have distributors, routes, or trucks in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. No employees reported to Gilbert. In February 2007, Gilbert hired her husband to work under her supervision as a distributor.

ABC promoted Gilbert in January 2008 to the position of district sales manager for the Dallas/Fort Worth area; she received a pay raise as well. Carnahan and Gilbert's supervisor, John Davis, approved the promotion and raise. Gilbert then supervised up to eighteen distributors, of whom up to ten operated out of ABC's Dallas facility. Although ABC eventually gave her a 4 percent raise in September 2008, she received lower compensation than did male district sales managers in other areas, and ABC did not give her access to a cellular telephone. Gilbert complained about this treatment, implying she was being treated differently because she was a woman. ABC informed her that the other districts had performed better than hers during the same period.

In January 2009, several distributors whom Gilbert supervised complained she was treating them unfairly by favoring her husband in assigning the best routes, providing him other activities, and giving him other considerations. The distributors also complained of her poor advance knowledge of sales contests and supervision.

They asserted that Gilbert was one reason for the high distributor turnover in her market area. A few days later, the distributors advised Carnahan of additional complaints of favoritism they asserted Gilbert had shown to her husband. Carnahan referred these complaints to

Weinzimmer. Carnahan and Weinzimmer then met with the distributors, taking their grievances seriously because they viewed them as ABC customers. After a more detailed internal investigation, Carnahan concluded that the distributors complaints were valid, and followed up by meeting with Gilbert. Carnahan discussed with Gilbert The possibility of transferring her to Houston and also offered her a distributorship, both of which she refused. Carnahan then terminated Gilbert's employment. Gilbert alleges ABC fired her as an act of retaliation for her previous complaints about sex discrimination in pay and not being given a cellular phone.

a. Has Ms. Gilbert been unlawfully

discriminated against because of her sex?

b. If so, which form of sex discrimination

applies?

Answer 1

[NOTE – If you liked the answer please give it an Up-vote, this will be quite encouraging for me. Thank you!]

[Q] Has Ms. Gilbert been unlawfully discriminated against because of her sex?

Yes, Ms. Gilbert been unlawfully discriminated due to her sex discrimination includes treating somebody [a candidate or employee] ominously as a result of that individual's sexual orientation direction. Victimization an individual due to sexual orientation character is discrimination in view of sex infringing upon Title VII. Indeed, there was an incredible vulnerability to the essential parameters of Title VII's denial of sex discrimination.

For instance, that employment rehearses that arranged people into two splendidly sex-separated gatherings naturally comprised discrimination inside the significance of the law. Here a few distributors whom Gilbert directed griped she was treating them unjustifiably by preferring her husband in allotting the best courses, giving him different exercises, and giving him different contemplations. The distributors additionally griped her poor development information on deals challenges and supervision.

[Q] If so, which form of sex discrimination applies?

The form of sex discrimination applies here is the Equality Act 2010. The Equality Act 2010 says you should not be victimized [discriminated] in light of the fact that:

[a.] You are [or are not] a specific sex somebody thinks you are the other gender [this is recognized as victimization by perception]

[b.] You are associated with somebody of specific sex [this is recognized as victimization by association]

[c.] According to the Equality Act, gender can mean either a female or a male gathering or a gathering of individuals such as young men or women or young people.