Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The alternative to a "disparate treatment" theory is a "disparate impact" theory. A disparate impact violation is when an employer is shown to have used a specific employment practice, neutral on its face but that caused a substantial adverse impact to a protected group, and cannot be justified as serving a legitimate business goal for the ...
The disparate impact theory is in contrast with disparate treatment provisions under civil rights laws as well as the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. For example, if an hypothetical fire department used a 100-pound test, that policy might disproportionately exclude female job applicants from employment.
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.
"Discrimination is discrimination," Ames told Reuters. ... Title VII in a way that ignores the realities of this country's persisting legacy of discrimination in evaluating disparate-treatment ...
Disparate treatment is what most people commonly think of discrimination- intentional. Under this theory, the employee must belong to a protected class , apply and be qualified for a job where the employer was seeking applicants, and get rejected from the job.
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]
To "reconcile" the supposed "conflict" between disparate treatment and disparate impact, the Court offers an enigmatic standard. Ante, at 20. Employers may attempt to comply with Title VII's disparate-impact provision, the Court declares, only where there is a "strong basis in evidence" documenting the necessity of their action. Ante, at 22.
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider on Wednesday an Ohio woman's claim that she was denied a promotion and demoted because she is straight in a case that could make it easier for people from ...