Can Koko succeed in a discrimination suit against Lively Sales Corporation?

Can Koko succeed in a discrimination suit against Lively Sales Corporation?

• A. No, if she was not qualified for the position
• B. Only if she was denied due to lack of experience
• C. Yes, if she proves she was qualified and excluded due to her disability
• D. No, because the company has the right to hire as they choose

Answer: (C)

Koko can succeed in a discrimination suit against Lively Sales Corporation if she can demonstrate that she was qualified for the position and that her exclusion from the role was due to her disability. The framework of disability discrimination laws, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requires that an individual prove they meet the job qualifications and that their disability was a factor in the adverse employment action they faced. In this scenario, if Koko is able to show that she possessed the necessary skills and qualifications for the job, as well as providing evidence that the decision not to hire her was specifically linked to her disability, she would have a strong case for discrimination. The law is designed to protect individuals from being overlooked or discriminated against purely based on disabilities, provided they can perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation. The other choices do not align with the principles of discrimination law. Not being qualified for the position inherently weakens a discrimination claim, as does the notion that merely lacking experience could justify the company’s decision without considering discriminatory factors. Additionally, while companies do have broad discretion in hiring, that discretion is limited when discrimination laws are potentially violated.

Koko can succeed in a discrimination suit against Lively Sales Corporation if she can demonstrate that she was qualified for the position and that her exclusion from the role was due to her disability. The framework of disability discrimination laws, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requires that an individual prove they meet the job qualifications and that their disability was a factor in the adverse employment action they faced.

In this scenario, if Koko is able to show that she possessed the necessary skills and qualifications for the job, as well as providing evidence that the decision not to hire her was specifically linked to her disability, she would have a strong case for discrimination. The law is designed to protect individuals from being overlooked or discriminated against purely based on disabilities, provided they can perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation.

The other choices do not align with the principles of discrimination law. Not being qualified for the position inherently weakens a discrimination claim, as does the notion that merely lacking experience could justify the company’s decision without considering discriminatory factors. Additionally, while companies do have broad discretion in hiring, that discretion is limited when discrimination laws are potentially violated.