Answer:by the items she offered on her menu
Explanation:
In a mixed-motive case, the defendant acknowledges that some discriminatory motive existed but argues that the same hiring decision would have been reached even without the discriminatory motive
This is further explained below.
<h3>What is
a mixed-motive case?</h3>
Generally, A case of employment discrimination in which there is proof that the respondent employer has valid grounds in addition to discriminatory reasons for adopting a specific negative employment action
In conclusion, In a case with mixed motives, the defendant admits that there was at least some discriminatory intent, but contends that the same employment choice would have been made even if there hadn't been any discriminatory intent.
Read more about the mixed-motive case
brainly.com/question/13122333
#SPJ1
Answer:
"Inconsistency" seems to be the correct response.
Explanation:
- It might be because for someone else makes a decision and those whose intervention does not in itself follow the values, everything just indicates there's conflict throughout his words and deeds as well as his principles.
- This would be the justification that the second hypothesis seems to be inconsistent with people's perceptions and values.