Affirmative Action And Employment At Will

1868 WordsMay 15, 20178 Pages
Affirmative Action & Employment at Will Affirmative action has been grounded in the social liberties uprising of the late 1950s and mid-1960s. The development conveyed a sensational change to U.S. social life through dissents, court choices, and administrative activity, coming full circle in the section of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, prominently known as Title VII. Yet, Title VII specified governmental policy regarding minorities in society in a good way that was exclusive to the Native Americans. It enabled special treatment to be given to them that resided in or in close proximity reservations. Also, Title VII prohibited separation in regardless of color. The applicable piece of Title VII says: "It shall be an unlawful practice for…show more content…
Government agencies such as the Labor Department worked with businesses who would be using the policy and also created ways to evaluate and measure the success of it. Case Example To give a better understanding of the Civil Rights Act and its goals would be the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Company which occurred in the early 70s. The legal cause of the case supposed that deliberate racial segregation was illegal, as well as hiring and workplace procedures that have sustained the impacts of past segregation. Also, the deliberate attempt to impede the hiring and progression of minorities, specifically black people, which may have been inadvertent should be forbidden and be renounced by those in charge. The black workers in this case argued that a common test was sufficient to rate someone’s ability to perform at a high level. The company required workers to take the test to be considered for a promotion. Standardized testing has been an intense topic because of the weak educational systems that many minorities have been through making them less to score higher than their white counterparts. This argument was used successfully in the case of the black workers. The decision of the case went against the company. It reformed the Act by looking at disparate impact as opposed to intent. The standard holds that it is not always possible to recognize those who would have been
Open Document