Disparate Impact/disparate Treatment Case Study

Disparate Impact/Disparate Treatment Case Study

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects applicants or employees from being discriminated against by an employer based on race, religion, gender, age, and national origin. Under Title VII, employers are prohibited from discriminating against an employee or applicant based on the employee's association in a protected group (HR Guide, 2001). This type of discrimination is called disparate impact. A situation in which the employer uses a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class is called disparate treatment. A company may only implement a facially discriminatory policy if it is a bona fide occupational qualification or BFOQ. (HR Guide, 2001) A BFOQ allows businesses to hire and employ individuals on the basis of the qualifications necessary or required for a particular position. Race or color may never be a BFOQ. (HR Guide, 2001) Aside from a BFOQ under Title VII disparate treatment is unlawful.

The Supreme Court first described the theory of disparate impact in 1971 during Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (HR Guide, 2001) On March 8, 1971 the courts decided Duke Power Co. was in violation of title VII. Duke Griggs Power Co. implemented a policy requiring a high school education and certain scores on broad aptitude tests for employees to receive certain promotions or transfers within the company. (HR Guide, 2001) African American employees and applicants had a lower rate of promotion due to the fact that most had no high school education and scored lower on average on the aptitude tests. One African American in particular, Willie Griggs, was denied a transfer due to the fact he did not have a high school diploma and he did not rank high enough on two aptitude tests. Griggs filed a complaint with the EEOC and a law suit in federal court. (Office of human resources, n.d.) The Supreme Court found the tests were not reasonably related to the the postions the tests were required for. (Wikipedia, 2006)

The most well-known disparate treatment case is Mc Donnell Douglas Corp. v. Green. The Supreme Court commonly uses this case as a structure for analyzing disparate treatment cases. (HR Guide, 1999) Percy Green, an African American civil rights activist and mechanic and lab technician at Mc Donnell Douglas Corp. was laid off. In response the layoffs Green and other former Mc Donnell Douglas Corp. employees illegally protested against