Ricci V. Destefano Case Study

The company claimed that the requirements were necessary to meet the qualifications of the position sought after, but it was later proven that those positions did not require those requirements. Mr. Griggs legal defense team claimed that “In-deed, the white employees hired before the requirements were imposed performed entirely satisfac-torily.” ( NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, 2016). Duke Power Company selection criteria was obviously flawed and wasn’t in accordance with the meaning of the Civil Rights Act. Their selection criteria limited people of a certain race and created a division among social classes.

In Adarand v. Pena, Adarand challenged a federal program that provided incentives to employers that employ individuals that are “economically and socially disadvantaged” (Alexander 149). Adarand, a subcontractor provided the lowest bid for a job, however due to the federal government’s financial incentives the contract was awarded to Gonzales, who was certified as a disadvantaged business. The Court in Adarand held that strict scrutiny should be applied to affirmative action or remedial programs that was based on race because similar arguments in previous case laws recur, such as “skepticism of race-based classifications” and “position on the question of benefits vs. burdens or race neutrality”(Alexander 150).

Attracting applicants from all levels of society including the working poor and single parents, recruiting talented workers who are satisfied and motivated has the potential to lead to higher productivity and greater retention (Green, Lopez, Wysocki, Kepner, Farnsworth, & Clark, 2015). The key to our successful Human Resources department is not that we hire a diverse workforce, but that we chose our employees from a diverse pool of representatives of the community. Building a reputation as a diverse inclusive corporation attracts the best from the

Research has shown that organizations fail black workers in three ways, one of which is through their hiring process, which heavily relies on social networks and personal connections (Wingfield, 2019). This strategy restricts black candidates' access to many organizations since the bulk of the individuals who currently work there are white and white people tend to have networks that are mostly made up of other white people. Therefore, the Rooney Rule should be revised to require organizations must conduct at least one interview with a minority candidate for any position, not just head coaching or senior football operations jobs. It would increase black applicants' visibility

By identifying the minority/discriminatory issues, Permalco can take legal precautions and avoid future litigation; meanwhile, simultaneously taking care of their perceived lack of females and minorities. This perceived lack of minorities can lead others to believe there is an occurrence of adverse impact within the organization; therefore, it is important to take this precautionary measure. This ratio test must be administered in addition with a realistic job preview for

“The employer’s workforce did not reflect the racial, ethnic, or gender percentage of the population the area does not prove disparate impact” (Disparate Impact, 2016). To prove a claim of disparate impact, “the employee must show that an employment practice does not select members of a protected class in a proportion smaller than their percentage in the pool of actual applicants” (Disparate Impact,

In the article, John Hunt College Degree Can’t Close Racial Gap by Michael Luo it shows ever since the founding and development of this young nation minorities are more often challenged more vigorously in terms of possible candidacy for employment. Every year a large percentage of college graduates join the workforce and as result the unemployment rates among minorities with degrees increase drastically. Many believe that these graduates are not aggressive in finding a job, however many fail to realize that it is not about individuals, or individual effort, there is evidence that in the job application process, racism is alive and well in today 's labor market. Various minorities go to top colleges, yet a black-name resume is less likely to

When the Civil Rights Act was written in 1964, its impact was widespread to say the least. Although it covered protection from discrimination based on religion and race, it did not cover the prevention of discrimination within federally funded programs. This is where Bernice Sandler steps in. Sandler, a well-qualified candidate for this position, was seeking employment as a faculty member at the University of Maryland. She was denied the position because she came across as “too strong for a woman” (Sandler). Sandler complained to the Department of Labor’s Office for Federal Fair Contracts Compliance and offered university statistics that female employment at the university had decreased because males had replaced more qualified female

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” What is Title IX On June 23, 1972, Richard M. Nixon (the President at the time) signed Title IX of the Education Amendment, into decree. Title IX is a wide-ranging federal law that forbids discrimination based on sex in all federally sponsored education programs or activity’s. Title IX is a law that was put into effect in 1972, that entails gender equity for girls and boys in the United States educational programs that receives federal funding.

In the first part of integration, many businessmen had dealt with the idea of black people being inferior to white people and did not change their mindset very quickly after they were freed from slavery. This in turn gave white people the advantage to selectively get jobs that had mixture of races in applicants and it also gave preference to what the business owners wanted. In Remember the Titans the new head coach, who was a person of color, had put in for a job in his previous town but got turned down. His response to a fellow coach about why he moved here was “I left North Carolina because I was passed over for a job that I had rightfully earned. Gave it to a white coach down there who couldn’t even tie up his own football cleats” (Yakin, 2000, 5:56).

The disparate impact theory of discrimination was first addressed by the Supreme Court in a 1971 case called Griggs v. Duke Power Co. In Griggs, a group of African-American workers at a North Carolina power plant alleged that their employer’s practice of requiring a high-school diploma and the successful completion of two aptitude tests as prerequisites for promotions discriminated on the basis of race. Many disparate impact cases over the past 30 years have involved challenges to the testing and promotions policies of fire departments, police departments, and other municipal agencies. For example, in Isabel v. City of Memphis, a group of African-American sergeants in the Memphis Police Department filed suit against the City of Memphis, alleging that the department’s written test governing promotions to lieutenant had a racially disparate impact. The dispute arose after the industrial psychologist who had designed the test used a cutoff score to determine which sergeants were eligible to proceed to the next step of the promotions process.

1. What best describes the type of testing as explained on pages 128-129. The type of testing used in this case, according to the Dial firm was the Criterion Validity. The firm created a test called Work Tolerance Screen (WTS) in 2000 and the purpose was to test potential new employees and current employees performing the job.

As an example, we could take the racially grounded belief in the inferior intellect of African-Americans to justify not hiring them for more professionally demanding positions. Anderson finds that segregation is the cornerstone of inequality between different groups. Simply put, it is a mechanism through which one group bars another from accessing both the first group’s monopoly of a good and how it is distributed—take the example of the type of roles that African-Americans were historically able fill in the armed forces, where they were often relegated to non-frontline roles. They were therefore unable to choose where they served, and could not accrue both the rewards and social status that went with frontline duty.

Affirmative action has been the standard of achieving equality in the United States but there has been an ongoing debate between those who support or oppose this principle and its effectiveness. The supporting side claims that affirmative action is still beneficial to equality. But a weakness for this view is that it doesn’t account for the unfair advantages that affirmative action can bring to its target groups. The opposing side believes that as stated by the book, “affirmative action denies the principle of equality under law” (Cochran et al. 349). This is a strength because, individuals should be accountable for their actions regardless of their racial or gender background to the fullest extent of the law.

Affirmative action is where organizations look not only at the educational or performance level, but also the person race, gender, and other physical qualities to determine if there are to be accepted in (Chapter Overview). This has led to support and opposition to the idea about affirmative action. Opponents see this as a strength that affirmative action will not help with making places more equal because organizations can decide if they want a person by their race or ethnicity instead of what their ability is to perform. A weakness would be that there will be still unequal representation of minorities without some sort of action. They believe that “that instead of ending discrimination, affirmative action actually does the opposite” (Support