Cases Reflecting Disparate Impact

Paper Summary:

This paper presents several cases that demonstrate disparate impact and treatment in the workplace. The paper defines disparate impact and treatment as when an employer uses employment practices that have a negative impact on a protected class. Such practices can include tests, academic requirements, and physical necessities. The specific cases are highlighted for their importance to this issue and their verdicts are clearly presented.

Outline:
Disparate Impact
Disparate Treatment
Case Overview: Patricia Hill V. Forum Health
The Final Rule: Patricia Hill V. Forum Health
Implications in Today's Business Environment: Patricia Hill V. Forum Health

From the Paper:

"The first case in history to examine disparate impact, Griggs V. Duke Power Co. made its way to the Supreme Court of the land. First heard in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, African American employees of the Duke Power Company brought a class action suit against their employer (Griggs, 1971). At the time, the power company required employees to hold a high school diploma and satisfactory scores on an intelligence test (Griggs, 1971). During times of heated racial debate, these requirements were put in place for positions previously held only by Caucasian employees (Griggs, 1971). While the District Court dismissed their case, Griggs V. Duke Power went on to an appellate court, where the decision was reversed, but the diploma and test requirement practices were upheld (Griggs, 1971). "

Sample of Sources Used:

• Griggs ET AL. V. Duke Power Co, 401 U.S. 427 (1971)
• Patricia Hill V. Forum Health, Sonya Clawson - Gregg and Elizabeth Maiorana, 167 F. Appx. 448 (2006)

More papers on Cases Reflecting Disparate Impact:

• Essay # 68502 : "Disparate Treatment and the Law"
• Analytical Essay # 58854 : "Disparate Treatment"
• Essay # 19632 : "Disparate Impact"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: