Allegations of Gender Discrimination: Crone Vs. United Parcel Service

In the case Crone vs. UPS it was found that UPS did not discriminate based on sex against Crone. This is a fair judgment in the aspect that Crone could not produce any real evidence that she was not promoted just because she was a woman. The legal implications of this case are simple. UPS did not knowledgably discriminate based on sex. Crone was not promoted because she lacked skills that were important in the supervisory position, which include confrontational skills (Find Law, 2006). This is not discrimination because she was not the best person for the job. UPS did not give a reason for not hiring her just because she is a woman; they gave proper reason, which was because she lacked essential skills. If they had given the reason that a woman cannot hire a supervisory job, then they would be unlawful under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Americans.net, 2005).

When Crone was not chosen for the position, management should have brought her in to the office and given her a full explanation verbally and in writing of why she was not chosen. If UPS would have done this, they would have better protected themselves because it was in writing why she wasn't chosen, which was due to her not having the right qualifications for the job. This is a very hard issue because it was seen publicly that UPS did not handle this situation with care. In any situation it is much better to counsel Crone on why she was not promoted, and give her the opportunity to improve, and then give her the opportunity to be considered for a different supervisory position when the chance comes. First of all you cannot be hired for a position that you are not skilled for, it would have not been right for UPS to hire Crone for the position when there was another qualified individual because then it would have been discrimination based on sex. You must hire whoever is the best fit for the job and most qualified. Crone was not qualified.

All companies should have a policy that states that no one will be discriminate upon as per the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It is essential for companies to realize that if matters like these are not addressed in a positive way that there will be bad publicity for the company. Each company needs to uphold the policies that are written and stand firm when cases like this do arise. It should be in writing when someone is not promoted, the exact reason for this and how the employee has been counseled. All companies need to give everyone the opportunity for advancement, but the individuals must be qualified. If they are not qualified and are passed up for a promotion they should be given the opportunity for improvement and become aware that if they improve they will be considered for a different position at a later time. References

Americans.net. (2005). Civil rights act (1964). Retrieved April 26, 2007, from Americans.net Web site: http://www.historicaldocuments.com/ CivilRightsAct1964.htm

Find Law. (2006). United states court of appeals: Sarah crone v. united parcel service. Retrieved May 2, 2007, from Find Law Web site: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/013595p.pdf