Logo-0

www.amperspective.com Online Magazine

Executive Editor: Abdus Sattar Ghazali

About us | AMP comment | Muslims in politics | Special reports | Press center | Opinion | Civil liberties | Contact us

HOME PAGE

Opinion 2008

Opinion 2007

Opinion 2006

Opinion 2005

Press Center 2008

Press Center 2007

Press Center 2006

Press Center 2005

Press Center 2003-2004

Anti Muslim smear

Muslim charities
 

The Recorder– July 26, 2005

What's in a Name?
A Basis for Discrimination, Says 9th Circuit

By Justin Scheck
 
"A good name," wrote Cervantes, "is better than riches." Mamdouh El-Hakem would agree. After spending years fighting a former employer who thought his name wasn't good enough, El-Hakem was vindicated by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week with a modest amount of money -- and an opinion that reaffirms the value of his name.

In a ruling that bolsters plaintiff arguments that discrimination can take many forms, the 9th Circuit said that Gregg Young, the CEO of BJY Inc. should not have insisted on calling El-Hakem "Manny." Or, for that matter, "Hank."

"Young intended to discriminate against El-Hakem's Arabic name in favor of a non-Arabic name," Judge Johnnie Rawlinson wrote for a three-judge panel, "first by altering Mamdouh to 'Manny' and then by changing Hakem to 'Hank.'"

The ruling is the latest to reinforce the view that a wide range of behavior can create a hostile work environment, along with liability for employers who allow harassment. …..

"It's a message to employers that these kinds of actions, which may seem insignificant or trivial to some people, will lead to liability," said Richard Curiale, a partner at Curiale Dellaverson Hirschfeld & Kraemer who represents employers.

He said the most surprising part of the case is that it went as far as the 9th Circuit. "I would have said, 'Let's settle the case, or we'll lose,'" he said, adding that in training courses his firm tells managers to avoid behavior that treats employees differently.

Jeffrey Wohl, a partner with Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker who defends employers, also agreed with the court. He said that employers should understand that differential treatment for any reason can open a company up to litigation….

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1122294926971