Disparate impact and treatment on employees and employers
The Civil Rights act of 1964 along with Title VII gives employees the option to sue business owners based on color, race, sexual orientation, and religion. This act, rules on the fact, that individuals can take action if a discrimination or harassment issues happens at the employer’s workplace. It expands Civil Rights statues to provide more protection against people who are victimized due to discrimination. It sets the guidelines for job related issues due to disparate impact or treatment issues. However, this act does not assure that everyone who faces discrimination will be employed because frankly he is a minority. If it is felt that there is a possibility of discrimination in the workplace then a lawsuit might be possible. In order for an employee to present a disparate impact case, that individual must show proof that the company has violated the rules or practices regarding a particular group of people. Then the employee or employees would proclaim that the company treated them different than the other co-workers given the same situation. Situations such as physical fitness test, weight lifting, or running might be subject to a disparate impact allegation. Other factors may include written tests, academic tests, or different types of interviews. All these types of tests are up for debate.
1989 was a year that a lawsuit was filed by the Wards Cove Packing Company vs. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 109 S.Ct. 2115, 104 L.Ed.2d 733 (1989). It was believed that the skilled jobs were filled by whites who had little or no experience working in a cannery. The unskilled jobs went to the non-white workers. These skilled workers were natives of Alaska (Asian decent). The court ruled in the natives favor. According to the Supreme Court (1989), “The workers appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed the District Court decision, stating the workers had made a prima facie case of disparate impact” (William Rehnquist 1). The court based some of their rulings on the percentage of the number of workers in the skilled jobs and the unskilled jobs. Along with this ruling, the Supreme Court appealed this case. It was believed that the plaintiffs in the case needed more proof. The court wanted the plaintiff to show more reasoning why that individual was denied a job based on race, creed, color, or other factors. The Supreme Court also wanted the employer to show the reasoning behind the testing or the requirements of the job. As a result, the case moved closer to disparate treatment. However, in these types of emotional cases proving the case can be tedious.
According to the Legal Dictionary (2014), “The Wards Cove decision was severely criticized by Civil Rights leaders, who believed the Supreme Court had made disparate impact cases almost impossible to win” (p.1). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was in effect. This act proposed that employees...