Case Study: Burlington Northern Railway

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that the courts negated Burlington Northern Railway's policy of genetic testing of employees, which was clearly a case of discrimination. The paper reviews the moral and ethical implications of this policy and explains that genetic testing is controversial in part because it goes beyond what many consider to be acceptable common standards.

From the Paper:

"The decisions made by Burlington Railway, however, do not qualify as BFOQ, and do not fit other standards that allow exceptions to EEOC. Opponents however, may suggest it is a violation of the employer's right to fire an employee or fail to pay workmen's compensation claims for an employee that was injured on a previous job, when the injury carried over to the new employer. There is still much debate on the issue of genetic testing in the workplace. It is safe to say however, that there is much more support for not testing than there is for testing. "

Sample of Sources Used:

• Nolo, 2004 "Exceptions to Employment Discrimination Laws, FindLaw for Small Business", Nolo. Retrieved December 2, 2007: http://www.smallbusiness.findlaw.com/
• Schafer, Sarah. "Railroad Agrees to Stop Gene-Testing Workers", Washington Post, Thursday, April 19, 2001; p. E01, Available: http://www.washingtonpost.com

More papers on Case Study: Burlington Northern Railway:

• Case Study # 127803 : "Dental Case Study"
• Case Study # 121828 : "AcuScan Case Study"
• Case Study # 127681 : "Nursing Case Study"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: