Pad 530 week 7 assignment 3 Agency.docx - Agencys Law and Ethics of Hiring a Diverse Workforce Part 3 Agencys Law and Ethics of Hiring a Diverse

Pad 530 week 7 assignment 3 Agency.docx - Agencys Law and...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 6 pages.

Agency’s Law and Ethics of Hiring a Diverse Workforce, Part 3 Agency’s Law and Ethics of Hiring a Diverse Workforce, Part 3 Wendy Morman Pad 530 Strayer University Dr. Stitt 5/17/17
Image of page 1
Agency’s Law and Ethics of Hiring a Diverse Workforce, Part 3 Laws Affecting the Agency First I will analyze Glowinski v. United States office of personnel management. In this case, a federal employee by the name of Karen Golinski and her spouse Amy Cunnunghis were married in 2008. When Karen went to add Amy to employee health benefits in September of 2008, she was denied. She filed a complaint that stated that denying her spouse health insurance was a prohibited discrimination. A judge hearing the case in January 2009 sided with Karen and ordered the office of personnel management to enroll Karen’s spouse under her Blue cross/ Blue shield health plan. But the office decided that will not abide by the ruling and will not insure Amy. They cited the defense of marriage act as the reason for not in providing coverage for Amy. The Judge again order them to abide by the ruling but also compensate Karen with back pay. In 2009, the office of personnel management again stated they will not abide by the ruling. In 2010, Karen sought legal help from Lambda Legal and Morrison & Foerster LLP, who filed a lawsuit against the federal government in the district court of California on behave of Karen and Amy. They stated that the defense of marriage act should play no part in deciding if Amy should be covered. The office of personnel management lawyers sent statement stating they will not abide by the ruling and will continue the fight to denied benefits. In February of 2011, the attorney general at the time Eric Holder along with the President concluded the defense of marriage act was unconstitutional and would not be defended in court. Even though the attorney general deemed the act unconstitutional the federal government still decided they will follow it while it is still law and will not cover same sex spouses. In March of 2011, the judge dismissed the lawsuit against the office of personnel management. The lawyers for Karen and Amy then filed a motion to eliminate part of defense marriage act, they deem unconstitutional. In February of 2012, Judge Jeffrey White declared section 3 of the defense of marriage unconstitutional.
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 6 pages?

  • Winter '12
  • terrell

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture