Good Example Of Case Study On Compliance AND The HR Functions

Summary of The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA)

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) was approved by Congress in May 2008 (Feldman, 2012). This act aims to protect individuals from being discriminated against by employers and insurance companies based on genetic information. According to GINA, genetic information “includes family medical history” (Feldman, 2012 pp. 744). Unlike other antidiscrimination legislation which only addressed past discrimination, GINA prevents future genetic discrimination from occurring (Feldman, 2012). The legislation was enacted to encourage citizens to participate in research on genetics; however, the widespread fear of potential genetic information disclosure and discrimination discouraged many people from participating.
The act focuses on two potential areas of genetic discrimination: employment and health insurance (Feldman, 2012). With health insurance, insurers are prohibited from using “genetic information to adjust group or individual premiums, deny coverage, or impose preexisting condition exclusions, and makes it illegal for them to require or request genetic testing or intentionally obtain genetic information” (Feldman, 2012 pp. 743). The only exception to this act is coverage in areas such as life or disability insurance, or long term care insurance (Feldman, 2012). In the employment realm, GINA protects against discrimination by employers using an employee’s genetic information to deny employment and other benefits such as raises and promotions (Feldman, 2012). According to Feldman, “GINA prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from willfully acquiring genetic information or using it to make decisions about hiring, compensation, and other conditions of employment” (Feldman, 2012 pp. 743-744). Ultimately the act protects individuals from genetic information discrimination and encourages them to participate in genetic research to help doctors find, predict and treat diseases earlier.

Summary of Employment-At-Will

The Employment-at-Will doctrine specifies that, “In almost every jurisdiction in the United States an employer can discharge an employee without notice and without cause unless the duration of the employment relation is specified in an employment contract” (Feinman, 1976 pp. 118). The rule applies to all employees on all levels of work (Feinman, 1976)—unless otherwise specified in a contract. It is an older piece of legislation that aims to provide protection to employers. Initially, legislators recognized that employees (with no signed contracts) had the freedom to leave a position whenever they wanted without reasonable cause and sought to give employers the same freedom to terminate an employee without requiring a reason; reflecting the belief that employees and employers should be able to enter contracts without obligations attached to either party (Muhl, 2001). However, a shift in favor of employees in beginning to occur. Legislatures are starting to recognize the advantages that employers have when negotiating with potential employees (Muhl, 2001). Whereas the employers enjoy many advantages and benefits, employees are much more dependent on employment for their overall wellbeing.

Law With The Greatest Impact on Employees in the Private-Sector

The legislation that has had the greatest impact on employees in the private-sector U.S. workplace is the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Signed by President Clinton on September 30, 1996, the act specifies toughest measures ever enacted that focus on handling and decreasing illegal immigration in the United States (Fragomen, 1997). The act is separated into several Titles which each provide new requirements, processes, paperwork and regulations to discourage illegal immigration smuggling and the hiring of illegal immigrants.

Law With the Least Impact on Employees in the Private-Sector

The act that had had the least impact on employees is the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act (USERRA). The act was implemented to strengthen the provisions in the Veterans’ Reemployment Rights statute which affects all uniformed service members (Stokes, 2012). According to Stokes, “the act protects the rights and benefits of public and private civilian employees who serve the country and expands the total amount of time an individual may be absent from work and retain reemployment rights (2012). In times of war, this act aims to protect unformed service members from losing employment as a result of deployment or other orders from the government. Under USERRA, employers are required to re-employ “any person who is absent from work because of service in the uniformed services” and be “re-employed in the job they would have attained had they not been absent for military service, with the same seniority, status and pay, as well as other rights and benefits determined by seniority” (Stokes, 2012 pp. 3)
“Uniformed services” includes any individual that voluntarily or involuntarily performs for the government in a unformed service to include: those on active or inactive duty, training, fitness examines, funeral honor obligations, National Guard and National Reserve members, and/or National Disaster Medical System employees (Stokes, 2012). The Act deems it illegal and outlines penalties for employers that refuse to comply. As the USERRA states, “an employer cannot refuse to hire, re-employ, retain, promote, or deny any benefits to an individual because he or she is a member of a uniformed service, has applied for membership in the uniformed services, or must fulfill service obligations. It also is illegal for an employer to retaliate against someone who exercises his or her rights under USERRA” (Stokes, 2012 pp. 3).

Major Similarities Between Employment-at-Will and the USERRA:

The main similarity between the Employment-at-will and the uniformed services employment and re-employment rights act is that is establishes a contract between uniformed service members and their employers. Under the employment-at-will- doctrine, employers have the right to fire employees without reasonable cause unless a contract is formed. For those in uniform services, the USERRA acts as the contract and deems it illegal for employers to fire employees without reasonable cause. Just as employment-at-will recognizes the freedom that both parties have to leave an existing arrangement, the USERRA recognizes the duty that uniformed service members have to protect their country.

References

Feldma, A. E., (2012). The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA): Public Policy
and Medical Practice in the Age of Personalized Medicine. Journal of General Internal
Medicine. 27(6), 743-746. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3358381/
Fragomen, A. T.. (1997). The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996: An Overview. The International Migration Review, 31(2), 438–460. Retrieved
Feinman, J. M.. (1976). The Development of the Employment at Will Rule. The American
Muhl, C. J. (2001). Employment-at-Will Doctrine: Three Major Exceptions, The. Monthly Lab.
Rev., 124, 3.
Stokes, R. (2012). Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act.