Dunlap Versus Tennessee Valley Authority: Racial Discrimination Case Study

Bent, J.R., (2011). The telltale sign of discrimination: probabilities, information asymmetries, and the systematic disparate treatment theory, University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 2011, Volume 44, Issue 4, p. 797

The proof of discriminatory intent is not required and although the court concluded that TVA’s processes with interviewing had been manipulated to exclude African-American candidates in general, the court disagreed, citing the “lack of statistical proof demonstrating that a protected group was adversely affected thus establishing a “prima facie” case” (Walsh, 2010). Dunlap did not prove, within the evidence presented, that the procedures TVA used were practiced prior. Although the district court concluded that “TVA's interview process had been manipulated to exclude African American candidates” (Walsh, 2010), the court of appeals disagreed because it did not believe there was analytical data that blatantly prove how any protected group was impacted adversely. The court found that Dunlap can only challenge his specific interview processes and not an entire group.

Federal (Title VII) and State legislation prohibit intentional discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and prohibit both “disparate treatment” and “disparate impact” discrimination.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces the federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or employee. An employer cannot discriminate due to a person’s color, religion, race, gender identity, sexual orientation, pregnancy, national origin, age (40 years or older), genetic information or disability. This applies to wages, harassment, training, benefits, hiring, and firing. EEOC’s role in any investigation of discrimination is to accurately and fairly take in the information of the charge and then make a finding. If the EEOC found that there was indeed a discriminating case then they will try to settle it. If the employer does not settle then the EEOC may file a lawsuit. (Overview.

EEO states which is that EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person 's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. These laws apply to all types of work situations, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits.

The United States Supreme Court, as well as federal district and state courts, defines employee rights and an employer’s liability for employment law violations. Treatment on the job, including hiring, firing, and promotions, must be based on qualifications and merit and not on race, gender, age, sexual preference or how one responds to sexual advances. Yet despite these laws and policies, many employees continue to suffer from workplace harassment and employment discrimination.

Title VII applies to state and local governments with 15 or more employees and also applies to employment agencies and labor organizations including our federal government. Based on Title VII employment opportunities cannot be denied to any person based upon their race or perceived race or because of their marriage or association with a person or persons of a particular color or race. Title VII also prohibits employment decisions based on stereotypes and assumptions pertaining to the abilities, traits, or the performance of persons from certain racial groups. Title VII makes it unlawful to discriminate when recruiting, hiring, and promoting, transferring, also work assignments, performance measurements, the work environment, job training, discipline and discharge this also includes wages and benefits, and anything else including condition and the privilege of employment. Title VII not only prohibits intentional discrimination, it also covers neutral job policies that disproportionately affect any person of a certain race, color, nationality that are not related to the job and the needs of the

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit was to determine if the plaintiff, David Dunlap Dunlap, had met the burden of proof that the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was liable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by intentionally discriminating against him under both disparate impact and disparate treatment analyses and whether the TVA appeal to the District Court erred in each of these analyses could be legally supported to reverse their decision FindLaw, 2011).

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects classes from jobs discriminating against them based on their race, color, national origin, sex, and religion. It is unlawful for an employer to refuse to hire or to fire an individual because of their class. Title VII provided employment equality for minority people seeking jobs. The EEOC recognized certain classes that could not be discriminated against. The racial group includes, African American, Asian, Caucasian, Native American, and a Pacific Islander. Closely connected with racial discrimination is discrimination against someone’s color. “Color refers to the color or complexion of a person’s skin” (651, Cheeseman). Racial and color discrimination go against Title VII.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of 1965 (EEOC) was cited as a federal government agency to address discrimination. Federal government agencies must ensure equality among people in getting jobs without considering race, color, religion, sex, age or national origin. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which forbids job discrimination on the ground of race, color,

Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act forbids intentional discrimination based on several factors: religion, race, color, and sex or national origin. There are times, however, where discrimination can play a part in the decision-making process within businesses, especially within the public school system. The three-step procedures for Title VII challenges are very precise regarding the determination of intentional discrimination and are universal for all cases of alleged discrimination.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965 was designed to protect workers from job discrimination. These employees are known as “protected class.” Under the Civil Rights Act, the Equal Opportunity Act of 1972 and 1991 provide for equal employment opportunity, in which everyone had the right to employment regardless of sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, or religion. The purpose of the Equal Opportunity Act was to make sure employees gained and kept employment based solely on their ability to perform their job (Schermerhorn, J. & Bachrach, D. 2015, p. 295).

The EEOC laws, or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, are federal laws that enforce employers to not discriminate against applicants of any background. Discrimination by types such as age, disability, equal pay/compensation, genetic information, harassment, national origin, pregnancy, race/color, religion, retaliation, sex, and sexual harassment are all protected under the EEOC laws. It is also illegal for an employer to “discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.” (EEOC , n.d.) The EEOC laws are to help serve justice and to create an equal work environment for people of any kind. The EEOC wants to accomplish the goal of having every applicant to feel at home without being discriminated against. These laws not only affect an employer hiring an applicant however; it affects them in firing, promoting, harassing, training, wages, and benefits. The EEOC’s role is to help find out if any applicant is being discriminated against and to help

There are three applicants for the job offering. One applicant is a white male age 35 who has six years of on the job experience. The other three are an Asian female, black male, and white female. Two of these minority applicants have no practical experience and the other only a few years. In order for the company to meet the quota, the company must automatically reject the white male and only look at the other three applicants. The company now is no longer looking for good experienced employees; instead, they are trying to appear fair. This so called ?equal opportunity? is not what it says. This means that they provide ?equal opportunity for minorities.? They are now discriminating against majorities, which goes against the original initiative for civil rights.

According to “Civil Rights Act of 1964", under Title 7, there is the nation’s prime civil rights legislation, which is Civil Right Act of 1964, and the act prohibits employers from any kinds of discrimination toward applicants on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, and national origin. The act basically protects all the citizens from workplace discrimination and prove that the citizens should have same equal rights regardless their race, sex, or religion. Especially, the act is important because it is a fundamental policy that keep citizens safe in the