Dunlap Vs. Tennessee
ABSTRACT
The fundamental legal issue of racial discrimination by way of disparate treatment and disparate impact caused by Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) against a qualified and experienced boilermaker foreman is what’s being argued in this case. David Dunlap, applied for a job with Tennessee Valley Authority as a boilermaker upon referral by the boilermaker union as a person who was experienced and highly qualified to handle the job. The interview was conducted and the questions consisted of both technical and nontechnical scores. After the interview process, Dunlap had the feeling the entire process was unfair. This paper will discuss the legal issues and the decision to award disparate treatment claim and also reject the adverse impact claim. Lastly this paper will recommend ways that TVA can improve their interview process.
What were the legal issues in this case?
The legal issues in this case involves David Dunlap who feels the interview, selection, and hiring process at Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is discriminating and goes against Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He feels he was discriminated against through disparate treatment by the subjective interview. He also feels that the interview was biased towards pre-selected applicants. The TVA is at fault because not only did they manipulate the score sheet, but they changed the procedures for the hiring process. “Despite the fact that TVA policy required that “merit and efficiency form the basis for the selection of job candidates” and “education, training, experience, ability and previous work experience serve as a basis for appraisal of merit and efficiency,” the selection committee decided before the interviews began that the interview would account for 70 percent of an applicants final score and technical expertise would account for only 30 percent” (Gilmore D. B, 2008). This means that though their basis of hiring was supposed to be based on their work ethic they based majority of the interview, on the interview itself which was not proper protocol. They also picked out how many candidates they would pick for each group: outstanding, well qualified, and qualified. This is something they were not supposed to do either, which created the number of outstanding employees equaled to the exact number of available jobs. Dunlap believes the reason he was not hired was based on the fact that he’s black and the TVA did not want a black employee that was more qualified than the white ones. In the case of Dunlap VS Tennessee Valley Authority, the legal issue that was presented was discrimination, disparate treatment and disparate impact. The suit that was brought against TVA was for discrimination under disparate impact and treatment. Having