Chastity Jones, an African-American and the defendant in this case, was denied a job offer due to her appearance. Catastrophe Management Solutions, located in Mobile, Alabama, announced that it was seeking candidates with basic computer knowledge to work as customer service representatives. Ms. Jones completed an online employment application, and was selected for an in-person interview at a later date with other applicants. Ms. Jones arrived dressed in a blue business suit with her hair in short dreadlocks. She interviewed with a company representative to discuss the qualifications of the position, then Ms. Jones and other selected applicants were bought into a room with CMS’s human resources manager to be informed they were hired for the …show more content…
For example, utilizing an employment test and getting results that eliminate African Americans from consideration disproportionately is disparate impact. In this case the EEOC proceeded on a disparate treatment theory only and did not pursue a disparate impact theory. This is important and courts must distinguish between the two because they are not interchangeable. E.E.O.C v. Joe’s Stone Crab, Inc., 220 F.3d 1263 1283 concluded that if you allow a plaintiff who alleged disparate impact to assert a disparate impact claim it “would unwisely conflate the distinct theories of disparate impact and disparate treatment.” In a disparate treatment case the question is whether the protected trait motivated the employer’s decision to not hire. A disparate impact claim targets an employment practice that has an adverse impact on protected groups, but is not necessarily deliberate. At times in this case the EEOC confounds the two arguments by making disparate impact arguments in support of disparate treatment claims. For example, a few of the claims asserted by the EEOC include that the grooming policy fails to acknowledge “the critical disadvantage at which the dreadlock ban places Black applicants” and “the people most adversely and significantly affected by a dreadlock ban are African-Americans”. It …show more content…
An immutable characteristic is any sort of physical attribute which is perceived as being unchangeable, entrenched, and innate. A mutable characteristic is something which can be easily altered. The distinction between mutable and immutable characteristics is a fine line, but it is one the courts have drawn. The EEOC argues that dreadlocks form naturally in a person’s hair, and the term is nothing but slang that originated during the slave trade. They state “texture of hair has been used as a determiner of race” and “dreadlocks are a racial characteristic, just as skin color is”. They also allege that when black people display their hair naturally, rather than straightening it, they are stereotyped as not being team-players. However, the EEOC’s complaint did not allege that dreadlocks themselves are an immutable characteristic of black persons. They state that dreadlocks “are a manner of wearing the hair that is physiologically and culturally associated with people of African descent.” It is important to remember that Title VII protects persons in covered categories with respect to their immutable characteristics, but not their cultural practices. Based on the argument presented by the EEOC, and by analyzing past court cases that have dealt with hairstyles, it is safe to assume the immutable characteristic argument is not persuasive
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
3. Why did the plaintiff’s disparate treatment claim succeed? What was the evidence that the employer’s reliance on interview scores was a pretext for race discrimination? A complaint of disparate treatment can be proved if the plaintiff could prove that a candidate had been disfavored and others had been favored because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin by the employer. (P.222) TVA's selection committee established an interview scores were the interview subjective criteria has a weight of 70% and the technical expertise (skills) would account 30%.
On January 15th, 2018, the defendant, Mary Taylor, was accused of refusing to serve the plaintiff, Brianna Banks, at Mary’s Diner located in downtown Atlanta. Ms Banks, an African American woman, claimed that she walked into the diner, sat herself as customers were directed to do, and, after 20 minutes of waiting in the diner during what she described as a “slow time”, was not helped by Ms Taylor. Banks then proceeded to get up from her table, caused a loud altercation with the hostess at the diner, accusing the business of being racist and claiming that “if her skin was white, she would have been helped within seconds”, and then exited the establishment. After leaving the diner, Brianna Banks went home and did some research on Mary Taylor,
For the most part the opinion of the court in the Griggs case; held that the burden of establishing an employment requirement’s relationship to the performance of a job lies on the employer (Justia Law, 2017). Also, before Griggs, the employees or applicant had the burden of establishing a discriminatory intent behind an employment requirement (Justia Law, 2017). The Court concluded that the subtle, illegal, purpose of these requirements was a safeguard Duke’s long-standing policy to give job preference to its white employees (Justia Law,
After carefully reviewing the oral argument and brief of case 14-191, Abigail Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, I was impressed how well the plaintiff attorney argued her defense during the trail. The litigations were as stated, in 2008, the UT Austin enrollment department wrongfully denied admission based upon the school considered race discrimination in its admission process because Fisher was a white female student, and because of her inadequate academic achievements. Fisher lawyer focus adequately on the highlight of the case by persuading the court that she would have gotten accepted into the university if she wasn’t stereotyped on such matters: race, top 10 percent student, grades, test scores which she refer to as personal achievement index. UT at Austin attorneys really didn’t have much leading factories to propose a concrete objective. In the argument Fisher attorney used the Justice Powell‘s example on Bakke system to support is statement.
“She wanted the wait staff to be middle aged black men, wearing white coats and black bow ties”. My jaw dropped. I could not believe what I was hearing. I instantly had such dislike and anger towards this woman. Upon doing research for this week’s discussion I learned the law suit that was brought against her for sexual harassment and discrimination were thrown out.
Erica Beckman Duran English 1A 28 October 2015 Affirmative Action In Chapter Seven of Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? , Beverly Tatum discusses affirmative action, an action that guarantees equal opportunity to all individuals, regardless of any circumstances (117). Tatum remarks on the history of affirmative action, in which it was introduced to language and our legal system by executive order 11246 by President Lyndon B. Johnson (1965), and obligated federal contractors to “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, religion, sex, or national origin” (116-117).
The Title VII’s disparate-impact provision inhibits employment practices that have the unintentional effect of race discrimination (Walsh, 2016, p.114). Even though Congress enacted Title VII for the main purpose of confronting racial discrimination in the workplace, courts have continued to struggle to appropriately address the prevalence of subtle racial discrimination that burdens minority applicants/employees today (Ritenhouse, 2013). Another legal issue included in this case is North Hudson refusing to implement non-discriminatory hiring procedures that do not disproportionately exclude African-Americans from employment without evidence of business need. The employer also refused to correct the effects of previous discriminatory practices. As an end result of this case, the District Court held that the employer’s business-necessity justification was insufficient and that there were alternative means to achieve the goals stated that were less
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” Chief Justice John Roberts stated this on the Supreme Court case of Ricci v. DeStefano. This case, which was on the issue of discrimination of African American firefighters in the city of New Haven, Connecticut, isn’t the only one of its kind. Brown v. Board of Education, Korematsu v. U.S., and Batson v. Kentucky are just a few of many. Cases like these, the situations in Ferguson, Missouri, Baltimore, Maryland, and Sanford, Florida, have all occurred because of racial discrimination.
On the other hand, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act attempts to remedy the “structural imbalance of the court system” by regulating private employers (Han, Week 3 Lecture, 1/23/17). Title VII uses statutory laws to regulate private employers from discriminating against characteristics like race and sex in the workplace by threatening the profits of these private entities (Han, Week 3 Lecture, 1/23/17). Unfortunately, these Title VII claims face their own barriers in court, making it difficult to use subtle discrimination to prove inequality. The limitations of these approaches are evidenced in cases like Washington v. Davis Sup. Ct. (1976), Griggs v Duke Power Co Sup.
One can’t help but wonder why? In his 2009 essay about discrimination and illegal immigration, Earl Hutchinson, an African American author who focuses on political and racial issues in America, considers the current stereotype of black people in America and how it impacts hiring discrimination. He shares that
Institutional racism is inevitable in the United States. Institutional racism is constantly occurring, whether it be in the work force, schools, or the criminal justice system. The color of one’s skin is a determining factor for his success in a company, and whether or not he ends up in the court systems, and for how long. Although laws such as the Thirteenth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and Fifteenth Amendment have been put in place to avoid racism in America and give black people equal rights, institutional racism is still holding African Americans back.
This has been counteracted with The Equality Act in 2015 which is a bill in the United States House of Representatives and the Senate that will soon be passed down to modify the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include protections that ban discrimination on the basis of
In Walter Mosley 's fictional short story, "Equal Opportunity" (1995), he describes employment discrimination through the character of Socrates Fortlow, an African American ex-convict attempting to find employment. Socrates lives in an abandoned building in Los Angeles neighborhood called Watts. He has been out of “prison eight years, fifty-eight years old, and ready to start life over again,” (Mosley 1). Socrates faces several conflicts, attempting to gain employment, because of his (1) age, (2) race, and (3) where he lives. He has to travel far to look for a job because everyone on his side of town, especially, Crenshaw and Washington, both store owners in Watts, knew that he collected bottles and cans for money and “they would not hire
In the workforce, there are wage gaps amongst different races. African americans earn seventy-three percent as much as whites and hispanics earn sixty-nine percent as much (Patten 9). Although the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State and Federal powers to exploit an employee based upon their race, religion, and gender, there is still discrimination in how much a person earns based upon their race and gender. Even though there is an equal employment opportunity agency that protects an individual’s civil rights in a workplace, there is still racial bias in salary
Models for Crisis and Disasters Management Student: Hirschkorn Remus Alexandru Introduction The risk and crisis management systems are support decision systems placed at the highest level of a hierarchical intelligent system of alerts, which could be implemented in different domains where the risk of happening an undesirable event that can disturb the good function of a critical infrastructure exists. Am alerting system should be put in place and this should notify a operator or the competent authorities, depending on the nature of the disaster, regarding an abnormality in the pattern of the normal conditions.