NAACP V. North Hudson Regional Fire & Rescue: Case Study

759 Words4 Pages

In the case NAACP v. North Hudson Regional Fire & Rescue, a fire department in New Jersey adhered to a residency requirement for firefighters that proved to be unsound and resulted in a disparate impact on African-Americans. This particular requirement affected all firefighter candidates and covered only the date of hiring; therefore, once the firefighters were hired, they were free to live anywhere, including outside of the district. There was evidence in this case that suggested 37.4% of protected service positions are held by African-Americans in the area. With this evidence, an individual would be led to believe that around 121 of North Hudson firefighters were African-American, when in fact, there were only two employed (“NAACP v N …show more content…

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 …show more content…

North Hudson did not require its firefighters to remain in North Hudson municipalities after they were hired; in fact, in 2008, there were only 34% to 36% of North Hudson firefighters who were residents; therefore, the initial claim to increase the response time for emergencies was invalid (Walsh, 2015, p.115). North Hudson also failed to validate that the requirements that led to an increase in firefighters who speak Spanish. The court stated that there are alternative non-discriminatory ways to ensure the employment of Spanish speaking firefighters, such as seeking bilingual applicants. Finally, community pride does not justify discriminatory practices for

Show More
Open Document