Question Options:
A) cause of action for breach of implied covenant of good faith.
B) retaliation claim as a result of whistleblowing activities.
C) legitimate claim under bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ).
D) disparate impact employment discrimination.
Answer: retaliation claim as a result of whistleblowing activities.
A retaliation claim involves an act whereby an employer treats an employee adversely when an employee alleges about any wrong, harassment or discrmination.
James was involved in whistleblowing which is the act whereby an individual passes information about a wrongdoing in an organisation. Based on this whistleblowing (reporting that particular batch of widgets did not meet the exacting requirements of the U.S) his boss demoted him( retaliation). Hence, James has a claim for retaliation.
Answer:
Islam spread arcoss North Africa into the eastern Horn of Africa, and even over the SAHARA DESERT into the West Africa. The arrival had a major impact on the political and social development of those regions, and it remains a significant force in Africa today
Answer:
The most conspicuous effect of communism on China is censorship. Though often depicted as a blatant handicap to media and social interaction, censorship in China is often very subtle and, although it tends to forbid criticism of the government, is itself governed by no exact rules.
Explanation:
Answer:
el profesionista debe conducirse con justicia, honradez, honestidad, diligencia, lealtad, respeto , formalidad, discreción, honorabilidad, ... sinceridad, provida, dignidad, buena fe y en estricta observancia a las normas legales y éticas de su profesión. el enunciado se refiere a una disposición o norma ética ...
Explanation:
MORE POWER
Supreme Court, is the highest court in the judicial system, and it is the last court for resolving non-constitutional matters.
The Supreme Court's affirmative action in the case of Regents v. Bakke by the following:
(B) Racial quotas were not used to make admissions decisions.
<h3>The Supreme Court's affirmative action in the case of Regents v. Bakke</h3><h3 />
- The supreme court on June 18, 1978, declared affirmative action constitutional but invalidate the use of racial qoutes.
- Allan Bakke, a white man of California, filed a complaint against The medical school at the University of California, Davis.
- He applied twice to the medical school and with good marks but didnt get admission.
- Bakke said he had been subjected to unjust "race discrimination."
- In the Court, six separate opinions were issued, agreed that the university’s use of racial quotas was unconstitutional, and ordered that the medical school admit Bakke.
Thus, option (B) Racial quotas were not used to make admissions decisions is correct.
To know more about Supreme Court, visit here:
brainly.com/question/1755400
