Employment Law
Join now to read essay Employment Law
Disparate Impact is defined as where an employer is not motivated by discriminatory intent. Title VII prohibits an employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that as an unfair unfavorable impact on members of a protected class. The United States Supreme court first described the disparate impact theory in 1971, in the Griggs v. Duke Power Company (401 U.S 424). Title VII also goes on to confirm that disparate impact “proscribes not only overt discrimination but also practices that are in fair form, but discriminatory in operation.” Examples of practices that may be subject to disparate impact include written test, height and weight requirements, educational requirements, and subjective procedures, such as interviews.
Griggs v. Duke Power Company (1971) was a court case brought before the United States Supreme Court on December 12, 1970. Duke Power Company did not allow African-American employees to be promoted out of the Labor Department. Duke Power Company enforced this by requiring employees to have a high school diploma in order to be promoted out of the Labor Department which in most cases African Americans did not have. The issue was whether the new law banned Duke Power Company from requiring a high school education and the passing of a standardized general intelligence test as conditions of employment when the standards were not significantly related to the job performance. African Americans were not qualified by the standards at a largely higher rate than Caucasian applicants and the jobs at issue had beforehand only been filled by Caucasians as part of an ancient practice of discrimination. Based on the Civil Rights Act, they changed their policy such that one of two high school equivalency tests could stand in the place of a high school diploma.
The 8-0 Supreme Court decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Company established new definitions of employment discrimination. The United States Supreme Court ruled against a procedure used by the company when selecting employees for internal transfer and promotion to certain positions, namely requiring a high school education and certain scores on aptitude tests. African-American applicants, who were at the time less likely to have a high school diploma were averaging lower scores on the aptitude tests and selected at a lesser rate for higher positions compared to Caucasian candidates. The Court found that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, if such tests disparately impact ethnic minority groups. The Court of Appeals later reversed this action, rejecting the lingering prejudice arising from previous practices was protected from corrective action, but agreed with the lower court that there was no showing of discriminatory purpose, although businesses must demonstrate that such tests are reasonably related and