The case, Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority, explores the issue of suspected racial discrimination associated with disparate treatment and disparate impact caused by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) against a qualified, experienced boilermaker and foreman that is African American. Questions for the court to evaluate regarding this case include: Is this a case of disparate treatment and/or impact and was the plaintiff, David Dunlap, subject to racial discrimination? Finally, did the TVA use personal hiring practices that allowed for racial bias in the interviewing process?
What are the legal issues of this case? The Court in the 6th Circuit was to determine if the plaintiff, David Dunlap, had met the burden of proof that his
…show more content…
The proof of discriminatory intent is not required and although the court concluded that TVA’s processes with interviewing had been manipulated to exclude African-American candidates in general, the court disagreed, citing the “lack of statistical proof demonstrating that a protected group was adversely affected thus establishing a “prima facie” case” (Walsh, 2010). Dunlap did not prove, within the evidence presented, that the procedures TVA used were practiced prior. Although the district court concluded that “TVA's interview process had been manipulated to exclude African American candidates” (Walsh, 2010), the court of appeals disagreed because it did not believe there was analytical data that blatantly prove how any protected group was impacted adversely. The court found that Dunlap can only challenge his specific interview processes and not an entire group.
Explain why the plaintiff's disparate treatment claims succeed?
The disparate treatment doctrine requires that any plaintiff must demonstrate that an employer has treated some group of people less favorably than others because of any protected classification to include their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. According to Walsh, “Three provisions required to prove disparate treatment are (1) the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination; (2) the employer must articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory
The process of establishing if an action/policy is discriminatory can be very challenging. However, a number of theories seek to differentiate actions that constitute discrimination and those that do not. Disparate treatment Theory is amongst the most commonly used theories that have been used to ascertain whether an act or policy amounts to discrimination or not. The theory argues that one is subject to discrimination if they are treated less favorably than others are in similar situations (Bent, 2011).
In disparate impact theory, the plaintiff has to show that there was discrimination done by his employer. He has to show that discrimination was involved in his dismissal and not on the basis of his performance at work. The employer would be charged by the disparate impact theory if age, sex or racial discrimination is proven.
In the workplace, racial profiling is often referred to as stereotyping. For example, sometimes employers do not judge a person on their skill level, but they use stereotyping as a form of judging them based on the color of their skin. This form of practice is wrong and can be unfair toward certain ethnic races because they will be focused on what people look like and what people in that race are known to do. This will give other people who may have lower qualifications a better chance to receive the job because they are stereotyped into a group that are “known” to have better characteristics for a certain job. On the other hand, this may allow people who are better qualified to lose this job position. There has been recent statistics that show that U.S. born Asians who have college degree on average have an 8% lower pay rate than American white men while first generation immigrants who have education completed overseas saw a 29% pay discrepancy (Racial Wage Gap in the United States). Some employers may argue that there is no factual evidence to support racial profiling does happen in and around the workplace. That is a false claim. There had been many incidents where there have been complaints about people having lower paying jobs, lacking the rights of promotion and being insulted by other managers. There has been an attempt to file an interesting kind of lawsuit. According to the Nashville Post, a group of employees
As Anita Hill once stated, “We have a history of gender and racial bias in our court that continues to undermine the system. Excluding individuals based on race is antagonistic to the pursuit of justice.” RACISM- Another word for ignorance; another way of saying nature should have had only one type of flower or one species of animal. Racism is like looking at a box of crayons and not seeing all the colors. Racism is another word for fear- fear of the unknown. For many of us, those of diverse races and creeds are the great unknown. The simple question that begs asking is: why? What role does race truly play in the criminal justice system and is the system truly as colorblind as many individuals believe it to be? With this country’s shameful history of slavery, the Jim Crow Laws, and numerous other racially biased injustices, it seems likely race does, play a role in the countless facets in the United States (U.S) criminal justice system. Our system is clearly, not, color blind. Although a handful of naïve people remain oblivious to the racism ubiquitously occurring, negative attitudes toward people of color are, even now, prevalent in our courts. Not only is racism found in the corners of our streets, but also, it is found where we work, in schools our children attend, and, most significantly, in our justice system. It is about time for people to start examining the causes and begin looking for resolutions to this severe predicament. We – As America, have the ability to
The Disparate treatment is a unique discrimination practice that is forbidden by the United States labor law. The disparate treatment implies a prejudiced conduct towards an individual because they belong to a protected class that is under the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (Primus, 2010). This differs with the disparate impact; it is under the circumstances that the organization implements nonaligned rules that treat everybody similarly in form. However, they prove to be a bit disadvantageous to the individuals in the protected classes (Schneider, 2010).
Despite the laws and protections that have been established, workplace discrimination is still reported as a common occurrence in the U.S (Triana, Jayasinghe, & Pieper, 2015). The subsequent sections will examine a case of workplace discrimination as described by Monica Harwell, an African-American woman working for Con Edison, in New York. A consequent discussion of Monica’s account of discrimination evaluates the case in terms of
In today’s world, the American still has barriers to overcome in the matter of racial equality. Whether it is being passed over for a promotion at the job or being underpaid, some people have to deal with unfair practice that would prevent someone of color or the opposite sex from having equal opportunity at the job. In 2004, Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores Incorporation was a civil rights class-action suite that ruled in favor of the women who worked and did not received promotions, pay and certain job assignments. This proves that some corporations ignore the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which protects workers from discrimination based on sex, race, religion or national origin.
In the past, discriminatory practices interfered with recruiting and hiring diverse subjects to fill employment opportunities in America. Therefore, in 1964, legislation passed the Civil Rights Act to prohibit employers from discriminating based on race, color, sex, national origin or religion. Under the law enacted, it does not matter if the discrimination is intentional or unintentionally, and the burden of proof falls upon the defending agency to prove its hiring and recruiting practices are related to job performance. For example, the Baltimore police department excluded 95% female and 32% Hispanic men because of a 5’ 7” height restriction (Gaines & Kappeler).
many cases of discrimination, it can be difficult to prove disparate treatment or actual intent to discriminate,
In conclusion one would say discrimination continues to be an issue for black minorities in America. It’s important to recognize that black minorities get mistreated more than other minorities because that’s unfair. We’re supposed to all be treated equal not based off of our skin color or race. Stopping police brutality is one way to start making change. It’ll stop chaotic riots and people being against one another. It’ll help us to come together as a whole. Taking away discrimination will change the way we interact with one another and we will start building our society back and will be given a positive outcome. This is what needs to be done in order for African American not to be the most discriminated against and stop the
In our history and lives, humans tend to judge others. If they think they are not like themselves, they are weird and judge them of what they are. This problem is affecting our society today and was a bigger problem in our history. Our society’s achilles’ heel is judging others and not accepting who they are.
As it can be seen from the calculations above, a clear pattern of discrimination has occurred in both the warehouse and store promotion decisions in 2008. In both cases, as well as in the overall combined promotion rates, black employees were consistently hired at a lower than acceptable rate than their white counterparts. Therefore, any black employees who applied for a promotion during 2008 may have a case for employment discrimination depending on their unique circumstances.
Supreme court cases have been some of the biggest and craziest cases around. The Supreme court does not only reflect the people of the nation but the government as well. I’m going to compare 2 cases, one from the past and one from last year. The amendment in question for both of the cases is the 14th amendment and has to do with marriage. To sum up the 14th amendment it's about equal justice and opportunity to succeed in life no matter who you are if you’re a US citizen. These two cases have had major impacts not only in the past but in the present day are Obergefell v. Hodges case about legalizing same sex marriage across all states and
The Plaintiff, Cindy Pilon, felt that she was not considered for the position that she interviewed for because of her race. The position at hand was filled by and African-American male. The defendants moved for a summary of judgment claiming that they Plaintiffs race was not a factor in the decision of the hiring process for that
In this case the court ruled in favor of the transportation agency. Due to Affirmative Action the agency had a plan to “achieve a statistically measureable yearly improvement in hiring minorities and women throughout the agency in all major job classifications where they are underrepresented” (Bennett-Alexander, D., & Hartman, L. P.). During the time of a promotion a woman was promoted with a score of 73, which was lower than Johnsons score of 75. In turn the promotion was given to the female.