Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Griggs Court stated that the "touchstone" for disparate-impact liability is the lack of "business necessity": "If an employment practice which operates to exclude [minorities] cannot be shown to be related to job performance, the practice is prohibited." [3] [4] If an employer met its burden by showing that its practice was job-related, the ...
In United States employment discrimination law, McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting or the McDonnell-Douglas burden-shifting framework refers to the procedure for adjudicating a motion for summary judgement under a Title VII disparate treatment claim, in particular a "private, non-class action challenging employment discrimination", [1] that lacks direct evidence of discrimination.
[2] Where a disparate impact is shown, the plaintiff can prevail without the necessity of showing intentional discrimination unless the defendant employer demonstrates that the practice or policy in question has a demonstrable relationship to the requirements of the job in question. [3] This is the "business necessity" defense. [1]
Intergroup approaches to prejudice reduction have been studied a great deal in laboratory settings, as well as outside of the laboratory, particularly in schools. [1] Many intergroup prejudice reduction approaches are grounded in one of 3 main theoretical perspectives: interdependence, [2] intergroup contact, [3] and social identity. [4]
In practice, the third step is the most difficult step for plaintiffs to achieve successfully. [ citation needed ] [ 13 ] This framework differs from earlier strategies for resolving employment discrimination cases in that it affords the employee a lower burden of proof for rebutting an employer's response to the initial prima facie cases.
Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. It concerned employment discrimination and the disparate impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971. [1]
New Haven officials invalidated the test results because they feared a lawsuit over the test's disproportionate exclusion of a certain racial group (blacks) from promotion under a disparate impact cause of action. [2] [3] The twenty non-black firefighters claimed discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is a form of institutional discrimination based on race or ethnic group and can include policies and practices that exist throughout a whole society or organization that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others.