Your daily summary of the top employment and labor law headlines
Source: Race Discrimination Articles
Discovered 14 months ago | 0 comments
Blog About: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Firefighters in High-Profile Discrimination Case, Sets New Standard for Evaluating Disparate Treatment Versus Disparate Impact.
Continue the discussion on your blog. Click to highlight this excerpt and press Ctrl+C to copy.
Related Articles
Supreme Court Holds that an Employer Cannot Make a Race-Based Decision to Avoid Possible Title VII Adverse Impact Claims Unless there is a Strong Basis in Evidence of Disparate Impact Liability.
In Ricci v. DeStefano, 2009 WL 1835138 (June 29, 2009), a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court held that the city of New Haven, Connecticut unlawfully discriminated against top-scoring white and Hispanic firefighters by rejecting the results of a promotion-qualifying exam to avoid a possible claim from black candidates who had not tested as well. In so doing, the court ruled that "before an employer can engage in intentional discrimination for the asserted purpose of avoiding or remedying an unintentional disparate impact, the employer must have a strong basis in fact to believe that it will be subject to disparate impact liability if it fails to take the race-conscious, discriminatory action."
On June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Ricci, et al. v. Destefano, et al., also known as the New Haven firefighters reverse discrimination case. The case is significant because it establishes that an employer may not manipulate the results of legitimate, job-related promotional examinations to obtain a more diverse workforce absent a showing that there is a strong basis in evidence to believe the employer will be subject to disparate impact liability if it fails to take the race conscious discriminatory action. The case breaks new ground by resolving potential conflicts between disparate treatment and disparate impact claims, and presents new challenges for employers faced with potential litigation arising from testing requirements or other facially-neu...
Ricci v. DeSteffano: Talk about A Rock And A Hard Place: Employers Required To Pick Between Disparate Treatment and Disparate Impact Claims.
On June 29, 2009, Justice Kennedy, writing for a 5-4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, issued the long-awaited decision in Ricci v. DeSteffano, a "reverse race discrimination" case arising out of the City of New Haven, Connecticut's Civil Service Board's ("CSB") decision not to use the results of promotional examinations. The Court held that CSB engaged in disparate treatment race discrimination against white firefighters when it decided not to certify test results showing a disparate impact on certain firefighters of color.1 In making its decision, the CSB considered evidence that the selection process may not have been job-related and consistent with business necessity and that an alternative employment practice having less...
'RICCI' AND A HARD PLACE.
When is it lawful under anti-discrimination laws for an employer to intentionally discriminate against members of one protected class, to avoid a disparate impact claim by individuals in another protected group? The U.S. Supreme Court addressed that question in Ricci v. DeStefano, 2009 DJDAR 9567 (June 29, 2009). The court's decision explains the interplay between two branches of anti-discrimination laws: disparate treatment and disparate impact.
Supreme Court Issues Ruling In Firefighter Reverse Discrimination Case.
On June 29, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that the City of New Havens action in discarding test results that were used to identify those firefighters best qualified for promotion violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, ruled that the Citys race-based rejection of the test results cannot satisfy the strong-basis-in-evidence standard, which the Court adopted to resolve any conflict between Title VIIs disparate treatment and disparate impact provisions. According to the Court, [f]ear of litigation alone cannot justify an employers reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions.
What is My Employment Law?
Every hour, we bring the best news and advice from dozens of blogs and sites to one place for our community of experts and enthusiasts to vote on what's most interesting each day. Join the conversation and submit an article for publication on My Employment Law!
Put fresh news from My Employment Law on your site
Embed our widget to your blog or site and get the latest headlines from My Employment Law automatically updated each hour.
Click to highlight and press Ctrl+C to copy
Latest Articles
Powered by: MyEmploymentLaw
Widget preview:
Latest Articles
Powered by: MyEmploymentLaw
What's Hot Today