Implementation of Business Governing Laws in the US - Term Paper Example

Final Term Paper Overview Implementation of business governing laws has always formed a credential part of the US legal structure. The US legal structure has considered the aspects of bringing in continuous levels of changes within their existing laws with the intention of improvising their areas of laws implementation. In this context, similar kind of law with wide applicability in the areas of business governance and has been subjected to multiple changes depending on the changing business scenarios has been discussed (GPOs Federal Digital System, n.d.). The law that has been chosen from the provided context is the ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’. This law forms a part of the ‘Civil Rights Act of 1964’ and ensures that none of the individuals employed under any sort of ‘federal financial assistance processes’ within ‘small business process’ are subjected to discrimination based upon race, colour, sex or place of origin (GPOs Federal Digital System, n.d.). As a result, the discussion will majorly focus on evaluating every specific aspects of this chosen law along with the techniques through which the business entities within the domestic markets of the US can utilize this law as a form of competitive advantage. In addition, the discussion will encompass the illustration of suitable case examples where evidence regarding implementation of this law has been found. Summarization of the Law The ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’ forms a part of the ‘Civil Rights Act Of 1964’. The law entitles the equalized distribution of federal or state governance funding or loan provision to all sorts of small scale or self-proprietorship business initiatives by taking consideration of the necessary financial and business related aspects such as applicants as well as recipients of a loan. Specific preference is provided to such business entities that projects involvement in terms of serving the society and surrounding communities. The specific discrimination prohibition aspects that are supported by this law have been provided as under in a summarized manner. The Act encompasses every possible dimension of business processes that are entitled to provide equal employment opportunities to the business participants without projecting any sort of discrimination associated with racial or gender parity (LegalZone, 2013). However, the ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’ forms a part of the ‘Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ that prohibits itself from being considered as a form of financial insurance. Rather, it projects itself as a form of federal help that is provided to the individuals or groups who intends to serve the common people as well as the nation’s economy in an unparalleled manner (GPOs Federal Digital System, n.d.). The ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’empasise one of its crucial objective regarding discrimination provision based on which free support are offered to organizations that encourage or provided employment opportunities . However, it does not entitle the assurance of providing individuals with specific employment opportunities in a direct manner. The sectional law also mandates the fact that every small scale business organizations entitled for such financial support provisions should mark themselves as non-profit oriented business processes (GPOs Federal Digital System, n.d.). Justification behind such mandate can be provided depending on the fact that without the presence of proper assurances, any profit based organization will not be able to make efforts towards the attainment of such federal financial support. Continuation of such misconduct may finally end up the government in a financial crisis situation (LegalZone, 2013). In this context, Small Business Administration (SBA) will look forward to analyse every possible aspect of the non-profit business processes that appears to be suspicious. If found guilty, SBA will primarily tend towards the implementation of informal means of tacking the situation or else the jurisdiction of the district, high or supreme court will be used for getting the case sorted. This will encompass the implication of legal proceedings between both the accuser and the accused parties (Gilson, 2010). In addition, the 112.7 section of the chosen law elaborated about the mandate of approval of all sorts of financial assistance demanded by a business owner, failure to which as a result of racial discrimination may lay in huge amount of financial penalties against the organizations that are entitles to provide such financial assistance. A specific instance in this context helps in providing a better elaboration of the entitled discriminatory prohibitions. Any hospital or an educational facility that demands for a federal financial assistance from the state government must adhere to the section ‘112.6 Discrimination in accommodations or services’ (RegsToday.com, 2012). In accordance to this law, none of the customers associated with such business processes should be subjected to any form of racial or ethical discrimination in terms of the attainment of services. The 112.7 section also inculcates the fact that the small business activities that rely on the provision of federal financial assistance should ensure that there are no future implications of the racial or civil discriminations that were subjected on some of the business participants during past instances. Failure to such assurance may result in cancellation of the financial aid that has been requested. Although the provisions are rigid, these governmental structured provisions should be categorized as a beneficiary proposal for business managers in terms of utilizing the financial aid (RegsToday.com, 2012). Another instance in this context can be provided by taking reference of the ‘section 112.4 Discrimination in employment’ in accordance with which none of the federal financially aided organizations should ignore or delay employee opportunities of individuals based on their races, culture, previous income levels and gender among others. From a technical perspective, this initiative appears to be an attempt made by the SBA towards supporting those factors that guarantee economic development along with adherence of communal harmony (National Archives and Records Administration, 2010). However, provision of such federal financial support to proprietor or small scale business is not an easy task and often requires the provision of specific assurances from the state government who will be financing it. For instance, every proprietor or small scale business process should allow SBA in terms of checking his or her business performances on periodic basis with the prime intention of ensuring work harmony along with continued federal financial flow. Moreover, within this law, SBA also appears to have granted the permissibility for customers in terms of filing complaints that are subjected to racial or civil discrimination within such federal funded facilities. In addition, the filing should be done in no more than 180 days after the incident (RegsToday.com, 2012). Guidelines for Compiling Resolution Under situations, where a compliant regarding subjection of racial discrimination occurs, SBA analyses every aspect of such incident along with the functional aspects of the facility against which the complaint has been filed. If the accused organization or small business process turns out to be guilty, then SBA will take consideration of both formal as well as formal techniques for resolving the situation. SBA within this law has also structured certain specific formal penalties for cases that cannot be resolved through formal techniques (RegsToday.com, 2012). Under majority of the cases that are judged under formal penalties, the state government may tend to suspend the provision of further federal funding to the small business agencies against which the complaints have been made. Under extreme cases, the state government may also project its authority of plunging in multiple other legal aspects, so that adequate efforts are tended towards supporting the interest of the individuals who have been racially discriminated. The case of [Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964)] reflects such an instance where the US government implemented multiple civil laws with the prime intention of prohibiting restaurants in terms of projecting racial discrimination towards its customers. However, the restriction over the financial assistance will only be made effective after obtaining conformation by SBA (RegsToday.com, 2012). Justification regarding the above aspects can be made based on the fact that if any federally funded organization refuses to adhere to the compliance guidelines as structured by SBA, then it poses a direct humiliation to be against the governmental norms. Under such situations, it becomes a mandate for the state government to impose several penalties against such business processes (National Archives and Records Administration, 2010). However, the penalty imposition can only be carried out after SBA issues a written or verbal notice to the accused party regarding their failure to the compliance of the stated guidelines. From a legal perspective this appease just, however rather than just accusing the organizations, SBA should also formulate certain penalty guidelines against those individual in case their allegations against the federally funded organization turns out to be false. Such initiative will support SBA in tackling with those individuals who take advantage of their racial or cultural backwardness (Loevy, 1997). Evolution Pattern of the Law The chosen law has been a part of the US judiciary system since the period of 1964. As a matter of fact, it has been subjected to implementation within multiple cases for attaining justified decisions. Thus, the evolutionary implementation of this sectional law can be understood by taking references of the case incidents that have been judged under this sectional law. For instance, the case of [Alexander v. Sandoval] reveals a similar kind of implication that took consideration of the ‘Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ within its judgment. The filing was done by ‘Martha Sandoval’ against the ‘Alabama Department of Public Safety’ as a result of her subjection to racial discrimination (OpenJurist, 2014). ‘Martha Sandoval’ felt that the initiative of the ‘Alabama Department of Public Safety’ in context to confining the driving license examination based on only English language as unethical and as a form of discrimination. If seen from a logical perspective, the faults pointed by ‘Martha Sandoval’ holds valid. However from a functionality approach, one can perceive the execution of license examination as per her guidelines as a time consuming process. ‘Martha Sandoval’ specifically pointed out this incident as a violation of the equality policy related to place of origin that brought down the success rates of the ‘Alabama Department of Public Safety’ by terrible rates. As a matter of fact, the district court was forced to provide its decision in the favour of ‘Martha Sandoval’. However, the count also made specific modification within ‘section 602 of Title VI’ for preventing such future happenings (OpenJurist, 2014). A similar instance occurred in the case of [David E. MOORE, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SUN BANK OF NORTH FLORIDA, N.A. a Florida corporation, Defendant-Appellant, no. 88-4018] that forced the department of justice in terms of bringing in major changes within the sectional guidelines of SBA. The case was against an employed individual of SUN BANK who was fired after recovering from a health related anomaly. However, due to the absence of necessary judgemental guidelines, the decision was provided in favour of the organization (OpenJuristb, 2014). The case of [Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States] also projects a similar kind of alignment regarding occurrence of racial and colour discrimination. The case was filed against a motel named ‘The Heart of Atlanta Motel’, which refused to provide rooms to the black people who were involved in the ‘interstate commerce’ related activities. Moreover, the owner of the motel posed reference of the guidelines mentioned in the Fifth Amendment regarding ‘the right of selection specific customers’ for a business process. However, the decision imposed on the district count turned out against the favour of ‘The Heart of Atlanta Motel’, which was eventually ordered to render its services to the black people as well (Oyez, Inc., 2011). The case of [Regents of the University of California v. Bakke] marks the non-adherence of the ‘Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ as a result of which it was subjected to negative judgment based on the ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’. In terms of projected claims, the university appeared to maintain separate admission sections for both the general as well as the minority class. This typical admission procedure appeared as a form of racial discrimination to ‘Allan Bakke’, a white candidate who raised his voice against the university. In this context, the Supreme Court was left out with no other option rather than providing its decision in favour of ‘Allan Bakke’. The university was also ordered to put an end on such admission practices (Pearson Education, 2014). In a similar manner, the case of [Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971)] also represented a parallel kind of instance where a black individual named Griggs filed a complaint against Duke Power Co., as a result of his subjection to racial discrimination within workplace environment. The case encompassed first of its kind and thus, appeared to a benchmark challenge for the Supreme Court in terms of imparting justice. The complaint was filed against the organizational policy that forced all the black employees within that organization to remain confined within the labour department. The organization also paid minimal amount of wage to those employees that eventually appeared to Griggs as a form of racial discrimination (NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.1971). Accordingly, the case of [Washington v. Davis (1976)] can be illustrated as an occurrence of discrimination where two African American inhabitants applied for a job post in the police department. However, they are rejected from the post appeared to them as a form of racial discrimination and as a matter of fact, they filed a case against the candidate selection authorities. In this context, the Supreme Court marked this incident as a case filing against Washington DC and thus, categorised it to be judged under the guidelines mentioned within the 5th amendment. Till date, no specific decisions have been provided against the filing (Thomson Reuters, 2014). Implication of Law Implementation on Business Process The prime intention of the US government in terms of implementing the ‘Part 112 -Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ was to support business facilities that generate equal employment opportunities for all. However, such legal implementations also led to multiple other implications over the business processes from the managerial perspective. In a similar manner, it raised the chances of financial risk on the government. For instance, provision of necessary federal funding support from the government often helps in minimizing the level of business associated risk. In addition, it may influence the profitability rates of the business organizations by a major extent. This from a negative perspective may pose considerable amount of risk on the government treasury in the form of unnecessary utilisation of funds. The chosen law also intends towards imparting similar kind of regulative measures on the overall performances of the small business organizations that are funded. As a result, every business organization that require the provision of necessary funding will have to make suitable modifications within their functionality structure through which they can attain both competitive advantage as well as compliance to the guidelines mentioned within the law. In the primary stage, the businesses will have to project their compliance to every guideline that has been structured by SBA for benefitting the organizations as well as the common individuals. At the second stage, the federally funded organizations will have to submit all their business related documents to SBA for periodic evaluation. The prime intention is to maintain a transparent communication with SBA through which every possible type of misinterpretation can be avoided. From a logical perspective, all these initiatives appear justified till SBA is provided with required information on a continuous manner. However, periodic continuation of such inspection procedures often hampers the functional pace of such federally funded business processes. The possible implications, benefits and disadvantages of business organizations that are subjected to federal funding are discussed in the sections provided below. Possible Business Implications From a general perspective, the negative implications of federal funding over an organization tend to be much more in comparison to that of the positive implications. Justification to this aspect can be provided depending on the fact that the compliance rules on such funded business processes are identified to be highly rigid and failure to the adherence of which may result in jeopardizing the overall funding support. Moreover, the funded organizations are often kept under the periodic surveillance of SBA with the prime intention of recording its functionality and profitability potentials. From a logical perspective, it can be stated that the continued levels of surveillance often increases the pressure levels over such organizations as a result of which they often fail to project adequate level of performance (National Council on Aging, n.d.). SBA also inculcates necessary surveillance over such federal funded organizations with the intention of minimizing the level of racial and civil discrimination that has projected its prevalence in the past instances. From one perspective, this may appear justified in order to maintain the social harmony, but from the other perspective, it also increases the risk levels of such business processes in term of being subjected to false allegations from customers when provided with unexpected service quality (National Council on Aging, n.d.). Regardless of these aspects, the business processes that rely on government funding are required to undergo multiple stages of verifications that eventually consumes considerable amount of time as well as labour. Even after that, the business processes are left out with no other options than functioning at a steady rate, which eventually lays a lot amount of pressure on the functional capabilities of a firm. Thus, from an overall aspect, it can be stated that implication of ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ often transforms the supported business process into a complete governance type system rather than being a performance oriented system (National Council on Aging, n.d.). Necessary Strategic Changes Implemented By taking consideration of the rigidity within the governmental policies, it can be stated that the federal funded business organizations have no other options than making strategic changes within the premised environment. One such strategy includes improvement of the service quality and customer response pattern within such federally funded organizations. This is due to the major focus of the government towards serving the customers in best possible manner in terms of both quality and equality. In this manner, the management heads of such organizations will achieve a competitive advantage in terms of minimizing the chances of customer complaints by a major extent (National Council on Aging, n.d.). This can only be achieved if the federally funded organization succeeds in projecting its compliance capabilities to the customers, which at certain instances turns out to be highly tedious. As a matter of fact, it can be stated that irrespective of the undertaken precautionary steps, certain amount of complaints from the customers or the employees are ought to come. Thus, it is suggestible that SBA takes consideration of all such issues before judging the federally funded organizations against any forms of discrimination allegations filed by the people. An organization whether governmentally or privately funded also needs to develop and expand at a continued pace for maintaining its sustainability factor. As a manner of fact, it will also have to generate higher percentage of employment opportunities in order to convince the government bodies for sufficing the increasing needs of funding. Thus, it becomes a mandate for such organizations in terms of implementing multidimensional expansion strategies. For instance, rather than remaining confined to one functional area, the federally funded organizations should also focus on other areas based on which they will be able to generate higher count of employment opportunities. Better count of discrimination free employment opportunities will gradually ensure higher financial support from SBA. However, such dimensional expansion will eventually minimize the self revenue generation capabilities of the firms as a result of higher employee count. The federally funded organizations will also have to design their functional structure in a manner by taking reference of the compliance guidelines as projected by the ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’. This is due to the fact that specific adherence to the compliances would act like a competitive advantage for organizations in terms of saving their interests from the legal proceedings and investigations. In addition, it would help in minimizing the risk factors by a considerable extent (Sherman, 2004). As for the suggestion regarding SBA, it can be stated that it should also provide similar kind of support to the profit based organizations that has the potential of generating higher percentage of revenue in comparison to that of the non-profit based organizations. In an associated manner, SBA should also lay significant amount of focus towards increasing the level of flexibility within their federally funded business surveillance techniques. In a cause and effect relationship, this will help in minimizing the compliance and penalty pressure from the business processes that in turn will subsequently help in improvising their performance levels. Respectively, the federally funded organisations with the implementation of the Act are facilitated in conducting operations by providing better employment opportunities and have sustainable and profitable business. Moreover, since the government majorly focus towards the profitability of such federally funded firms, the managers can utilize the financial support provided by the government in terms of carrying out various R&D initiatives. Through such initiatives, the management groups of such organizations can bring about appreciable level of improvement within its performance capabilities and competitive factors. Associatively, the federally funded organizations may also endorse themselves as credential economic supports that provide suitable employment opportunities for the unemployed sections of a society by utilizing the federal funding (Sherman, 2004). In a manner, this would ensure the attainment of higher level of market reputation for such federally funded organizations. Specific strategic implementations should also be undertaken by the managerial bodies of such publicly funded organizations with the intention of utilizing certain sections of the ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ as a competitive advantage. For instance, as per section ‘112.10 Conduct of investigations’, the government funding to a small business organization will only be suspended once discrimination charges raises against any specific organizations validated by SBA. Under such situations, specific compliance to the governmental norms may help in turning the entire investigation in the favour of such organizations (Sherman, 2004). Conclusion The above facts have been highly beneficial in terms of elaborating the specific set of guidelines that are mentioned within the ‘Part 112 - Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of SBA-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964’. From the provided guidelines, it can be understood that this sectional law forms a part of the ‘Civil Rights Act Of 1964’ that aims towards prohibiting the occurrence of any sort of racial or cultural discriminations within work place or against individuals who seek employment opportunities. Thus, the facts that have been mentioned in the above discussions inculcates the necessity of adhering to the compliance guidelines by the small business organizations intending towards utilizing federal funding for creating discrimination free employment opportunities. Throughout the discussion, multiple facts elaborate that federally funded organizations can be held guilty and how they can rely on the implementation of managerial strategies in order to remain in the safe zone. The facts mentioned also explain about the techniques through which SBA will be analysing and tackling the situation in case any customer comes up with a claim of being subjected to racial discriminations. In this context, it has been recognised that specific set of instructions through which the management bodies of the federally funded organizations can use the compliance guidelines as their competitive advantages. Through the provided facts, an attempt has been made towards elaborating the necessity of complying with the norms as structured by the US government with the intention of ensuring the continued inflow of federal funding support. Subsequently, the law has been identified to be effective in governing business in terms of employment, legal adherence, development of R&D and service quality. References GPOs Federal Digital System. (n.d.). 13 CFR 112 - nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs of SBA-effectuation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964. Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/CFR-2014-title13-vol1/CFR-2014-title13-vol1-part112 Gilson, S. C. (2010). Creating value through corporate restructuring: case studies in bankruptcies, buyouts, and breakups. US: John Wiley & Sons LegalZone. (2013). § 112.2 Application of this part. Retrieved from http://federal.eregulations.us/rule/title13.part112.section112.2 Loevy, R. D. (1997). The civil rights act of 1964: the passage of the law that ended racial segregation. US: SUNY Press National Council on Aging. (n.d.). Source 11: foundation & government grants. Retrieved from http://www.ncoa.org/get-involved/funding-sustainability/12-sources-articles/source-11.html National Archives and Records Administration. (2010). Code of federal regulations, title 13, business credit and assistance, revised as of January 1 2010. US: Government Printing Office. NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (1971). Landmark: Griggs v. Duke Power Co. Retrieved from http://www.naacpldf.org/case/griggs-v-duke-power-co OpenJurist. (2014). 197 F. 3d 484 - Martha Sandoval v. Hagan. Retrieved from http://openjurist.org/197/f3d/484/martha-sandoval--v-hagan Oyez, Inc. (2011). Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S. Retrieved from http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_515 OpenJuristb. 2014. 923 F. 2d 1423 - Moore v. Sun Bank of north Florida Na. Retrieved from http://openjurist.org/923/f2d/1423/moore-v-sun-bank-of-north-florida-na Pearson Education. (2014). Timeline of affirmative action milestones. Retrieved from http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmativetimeline1.html#2003 RegsToday.com. (2012). Part 112 — nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs of SBA—effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964 [13 CFR 112]. Retrieved from http://cfr.regstoday.com/13cfr112.aspx Sherman, A. L. (2004). Pros and cons of receiving government funding. Retrieved from http://www.urbanministry.org/wiki/pros-and-cons-receiving-government-funding Thomson Reuters. (2014). U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=426&invol=229 Read More