Disparate Impact Essay

Example 3: My colleague is a wife of her husband, parent of her children, teacher for her children.

Recruitment is the process by which a business seeks to hire the right person for a vacancy. (BBC Bitesize).

With respects to prevention it is imperative to the legal materials than it is to looking at solving complications after the fact for one’s that are existing. Preventive measures (PM) are a better alternative than trying to fix complications. When establishments do not take the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) laws seriously, and they do not have any preventive measures to stop things that can lead to legal actions they will always have a problematic and a less than efficient establishment.

The process of establishing if an action/policy is discriminatory can be very challenging. However, a number of theories seek to differentiate actions that constitute discrimination and those that do not. Disparate treatment Theory is amongst the most commonly used theories that have been used to ascertain whether an act or policy amounts to discrimination or not. The theory argues that one is subject to discrimination if they are treated less favorably than others are in similar situations (Bent, 2011).

Disparate impact is neutral employment practices or procedures that often unintentionally, result in unequal treatment.

Over the last several decades, workplace issues have become an area of controversy for most employers. This is because the regulations surrounding what practices are considered to be discriminatory have increased dramatically. To enforce these issues, the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) is playing a central role in making employers follow these provisions of the law. A recent example of this occurred, with the case EEOC v. HCS Medical Staffing Inc.

According to Bennett-Alexander & Hartman (2015), disparate impact is defined as “treating similarly situated employees differently because of prohibited Title VII or other employment discrimination law factors” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015, p. 64). It can be considered to be intentional discrimination, on the basis that the employee or perspective job applicant can demonstrate a difference in treatment by the employer without appropriate justification (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015). If an employee or perspective job applicant decides to file a lawsuit, then under McDonnell Douglas case, the employer must set up a legal test to consider all relevant factors, if the questions were answered and there is still no suitable justification then the only factors left to consider are age, color, gender, religion, national origin, or other protected category (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015).

Disparate treatment is the unlawful treatment of individuals that violates Title VII rights. The Different treatment of a plaintiff relies on direct, comparative, and circumstantial evidence to meet their burden of persuasion (Roberts, 2010). When individuals complain, they have been treated differently due to their protected class. They are claiming the organization has discriminated against them. For instance, this employee may state the firm only hires males at this facility. Upon investigation, the employer learns that the ratio of workers who are men is greater than women. At this point, the company may explain why the reason for hiring males is higher since women cannot perform these tasks as it may affect their well-being. Nevertheless,

In disparate impact theory, the plaintiff has to show that there was discrimination done by his employer. He has to show that discrimination was involved in his dismissal and not on the basis of his performance at work. The employer would be charged by the disparate impact theory if age, sex or racial discrimination is proven.

The disparate treatment doctrine requires that any plaintiff must demonstrate that an employer has treated some group of people less favorably than others because of any protected classification to include their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. According to Walsh, “Three provisions required to prove disparate treatment are (1) the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination; (2) the employer must articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory

Disparate impact refers to policies, practices and rules that appear to be neutral and yet result in a disproportionate impact on protected groups on merits such as race or religion. Disparate treatment, on the other hand, is intentional. For example, deliberately testing one race and not any others for a particular skill is disparate treatment. Testing all applicants of all races and getting results from that test that eliminate one particular race disproportionately is disparate impact.

For p4 I am going to explain how national initiatives promote anti-discriminatory practice. I am going to cover

The selection rates of each category (white, non-white, etc…) are indicated in the column corresponding to whether the employees were hired from outside the organization (external) or promoted from within (internal). In order to calculate the four-fifth’s rule, it is necessary to examine these percentages. The first step is to divide the selection ratio of the minority group by the selection ratio of the majority group. For example, in order examine the four-fifth’s rule in regards to African American employees hired externally in the Shift Leader position, divide that selection ratio (5.88%) by the selection ratio of white employees hired externally to the same position (16.31%).

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

Employees alleging discrimination must attempt to prove a prima facie case. Prima facie means that before a person can go to court, it must be shown that a wrong has been committed by stating certain facts (Sovereign, p.38). The employee must