Whether you experienced “workplace bias,” was a “wrongfully terminated employee,” or targted for “wrongful termination” because you shamelessly claimed The LORD Jesus Christ on the job before your employer after explaining why you couldn’t work on Sundays, you can go from “wrongfully terminated employee to side hustle millionaire.” It’s a blessing for your employer or some of your past co-workers or current employer and fellow employees to be biased towards you. Why? It’s sets you up for future “side hustle millionaire” status in entrepreneurship and additional blessings in the near future that they can’t take from you.

Below are open discussion questions and answers about a past workplace discrimination case in “Ricci vs. DeStefano Case.” You’re welcome to share this content with everyone and bookmark this post to your Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome web browsers.

Always know that in every adverse life event, there’s hidden good. While any negative workplace related situation may test your spiritual character in the moment, those who do you wrong eventually end up strengthening your hand. Not just to subliminally help you achieve “side hustle millionaire” status, but also help strengthen your spiritual well-being. And they think they’re hurting you by not giving you a promotion, rightfully due pay raise, and setting you up for wrongful termination. They’re doing the exact opposite. “Give it some time,” and you’ll accomplish more than being a millionaire and staying on those who meant you no good.

1. Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision?

The Supreme Court’s decision to be in favor with the fire department is seen by many people to be incorrect. Almost everyone knows that courts, at least a vast majority of them throughout the United States, will automatically side with a government organization almost immediately by default. They city of New Haven failed to certify the results of employment testing of firefighters. It was saddening to hear that the court found in favor of the district of New Haven, Connecticut and dismissed the case filed by plaintiffs who felt they were discriminated against after testing. The New Haven fire department claimed out of 15 scores, 14 were Caucasian and one Latino for 15 open vacancies at the time. Furthermore, some people feel and argue the city of New Haven fire department hid behind the action of not promoting currently employed firefighters as a means of subliminally discriminating against the one Latino minority who took the firefighter exam in hopes of fulfilling one of the 15 open vacancies. Though the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, they too are imperfect and occasionally make “impartial judgments.”

It’s still unclear why the case was dismissed. Something that interesting in the video mentioned by Mr. Derek was the “testing method could be allegedly introducing hidden bias.” A more firm believer that “if any company or organization doesn’t want an employee to move up, they will have set roadblocks subliminally in place to suppress and employees’ motivation from going forward in the workplace hierarchy.” From some former employees’ past experience, their former employer did just that. One person earned the company on paper a little over $170,000 in sales to only receive a $.25 raise. Then set up later for wrongful termination by a general store manager and had workplace related issues pinned on them, when it was suspectedly the general store manager who had a secret personal vendetta against a former employee who claimed religion on the job. The Supreme Court’s decision is seen as inconclusive, because it seems as if they’re only interested in protecting the interests of a government organization and suppressing the rights of the plaintiffs.

Some employers secretly know people inside the EEOC – Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and allegedly use dirty tactics to mute wrongfully terminated employees from filing lawsuits against them by suppressing EEOC investigations, making it hard to prove on the terminated employees part that the employer secretly knows someone inside the EEOC.

An article entitled “Supreme Court Makes it Harder to Prove Job Bias Claims” mentions “In back-to-back, divided rulings…, the U.S. Supreme Court raised the bar for employees seeking to prove discrimination in their workplaces.”(Coyle, 2013). Employees and wrongfully terminated employees can only prove their case to an extent because chances are, most employees who file eeoc complaints and lawsuits are first timers of the employment discrimination experience and don’t know exactly what to look for besides the fact that they’ve been discriminated against. They could lose a case because they haven’t properly documented everything or have anything recorded for audio playback. In turn, this gives an employer leverage to either have the lawsuit dismissed based on assumptions and hearsay on the discriminating employees’ behalf.

2. How can an organization balance affirmative action goals with testing fairness?

This question alone holds enough power in it to encourage a campfire discussion with marshmallows and hot chocolate that’ll last until the sunrise of a new day. One way to achieve this is by using employee intelligence testing software. It’s a good idea for employers to start the intelligence testing at a gender balance of 50-50, and allow both sides to fully complete their testing to see where their knowledge is about the corporation or organization.

With or without affirmative action, employers are supposed to know automatically without testing an employee if she’s mentally equipped and in tune to be promoted to management positions based on her on-the-job performance.overall, it’s still a good idea as a humble act of testing fairness to administer the test to male and female at the 50-50 just to have a record showing you demonstrated 0% bias toward any gender in the hiring and promotion process.

Any organization can balance affirmative action goals with testing fairness by not just administering employee testing using specialized computer software, but also keeping tenured employees on the same level as lower-level employees during and after testing. An interesting Forbes article published by Paolo Gaudiano and Ellen Hunt mentions “In general, promotions are based primarily on tenure (the most senior employees are most likely to be chosen, with a small degree of randomness), while hiring is purely random with a 50/50 gender choice.” (Gaudiano, Hunt, 2016). It’s a quiet fact that tenured employees tend to get more quiet consideration after testing and accelerated faster into higher positions with increased salaries, whereas entry-level and employees who feel bias towards them will most likely stay in the level they’re in a while longer, working with a virtual glass ceiling above them after taking the employee aptitude test. Employers need to demonstrate equal fairness toward lower-level employees and don’t treat tenured employees better than the lower-level employees. This is one of many ways employers can balance affirmative action goals with testing fairness.

Though employers have wide discretion in promoting whomever they want whenever they please, administering the employee aptitude intelligence test is a legitimate way of employers taking advantage of affirmative action because now, they’re using the answers of employees as a justifiable reason to promote, increase salary, demote, justify testing fairness, and use the employee aptitude test as a record of documentation which may later serve as a justifiable reason why an employer did this or did that.

Long story short…employers should always administer the employee aptitude test just to have their backs covered in case a situation arises down the road why in employee feels they were demoted or treated with workplace bias.

If you’re an employer or HR generalist who wrongfully terminated an employee for any reason and try to sweep it under the rug, your closet skeletons are not hidden. Guess WHO knows everything you did in secret and can’t hide an inch of a nat’s hair of detail from?

Hint..not the “eeoc.”