Disparate Treatment In Hicks's Prima Facie Case

This is exactly the case with Hicks and should be presented to the courts to support his position of disparate treatment in this case. In fact, the courts found that Hick’s did establish a prima facie case, and that the preoffered reasons by St. Mary’s were not believable. Yet, they also ruled that Hick’s did not prove that the decisions were racially motivated, but could have been personally motivated. Therefore, personally motivated decisions, while not best practices, are not unlawful and do not constitute discriminations by the company. The concerns with this type of decision, is that it makes it much more difficult for plaintiffs to prove disparate treatment in the future. The courts expect victims to be prepared to provide strong

Hicks reported other officers’ violations of institutional rules, but the claims were ignored and no action was taken). Additionally, Hicks could present the fact that in his six year tenure, he had never been disciplined or suspeneded. His performance records could be presented to show that he had been a satisfactory worker and there were no issues with his performance. Moreover, it is important to substantiate a claim with true and legitimate proof. This can be accomplished by keeping a journal with names, dates, emails, comments, anything that can be used to support the case. Also, write down specific details of the discrimination instances even noting why is falls under the category of discrimination. If someone else witnesses the instance, be sure to write down the person’s name, what was happening at the time, and who else was present. Keeping detailed notes and journals are a great way to document the situation in the case of