Such kind of a situation is made possible by the fact that the policies adopted for prevention of discrimination often times display great discrepancy between practical employment and the theoretical practice. When confronted by such a situation, most employees opt to take on steps that may help them navigate around the problem yet the results of such situations may be translated as discriminatory. In any case, a great number of employers seek to employ the most suitable candidates for the positions that lay vacant and for the sake of performance, employers attempt to offer the best environment for their employees. The environment includes the physical as well as the social environments in which the employees can perform to their maximum best. With these considerations to make, the employer has to make careful selection of the most suitable individuals for their vacant positions. The policies that prohibit against discrimination of people in the workplace apply to all points in the employment including the advertisement for a vacant position, the actual interviewing of persons, when the employee is hired, during the exercise of firing, in times of allocating benefits, during retirement and in the practice of lay off among other points. This paper will undertake to make a report on the possible best practice and legally approved policies that would have been applied on two cases in which situations that looked discriminatory may have guided the elimination of aspiring candidates for two different positions.
Case study 1; emerging issues
The first case sites a competently qualified individual who had a gay sexual orientation. The man had passed all the necessary tests and the interview and the interviewing panel for the local authority admitted that he was among the eight highly qualified individuals for the position of an apprentice electrician. Even though the panel decided not to deny him the opportunity because of his sexual orientation, they figured that his working environment might not prove conducive for performance. It was with this consideration that the panel dismissed him for the job.
The rights of employment that regards the sexual orientation of the employees or the employees to be are embedded in the Commission on equality and human rights. The commission aims at reducing any form of discrimination against transsexual people at all levels of employment. The transsexual people include the gay and lesbian individuals within the workplace. In fact, the regulations are not only enforced by the commission at the national level but also at the level of the local authorities. This then suggests that the local authority in which the man in this case could be held accountable at the local level for displaying discrimination towards the man. To make the impact even greater, the policies governing gender equality also cover the transsexual individuals found within the work place or those who are at the recruitment level. This therefore suggests the myriad of constitutionally recognized areas that could be used against the local authority in this case study. It is quite apparent that the authority was on the wrong as