Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
compare disparate impact and treatment
case studies on disparate treatment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: compare disparate impact and treatment
Disparate treatment has the potential to impact society, business, and my own personal experiences with a career in or outside of business in the future. Disparate treatment has an impact on my life today due to the restrictions and measures placed on any possible employers I encounter as I work part-time as a student. Since disparate treatment is the unfair treatment of an individual based on any one of the factors of sex, religion, disability, race, age, national origin, there is a broad category of people protected by this rule of law.
Disparate Treatment’s impact on society can be viewed in two ways: 1) the way in which it impacts those who might otherwise be discriminated against due to factors they cannot control, and 2) the way in which it holds employers accountable for their principles of hiring and employing those of protected classes. Because these classes are protected, the rights of many more people are protected and they are encouraged to seek out employment opportunities. This causes a decrease in the national unemployment rate and also increases the nation’s GDP. The result of employers being held accountable is that a higher percentage of employers may use disparate impact if they wish to purposefully discriminate in the hiring process. A positive that may result from employers’ accountability, however, is that employers can use this equality to encourage more applicants from protected groups who might otherwise think that they would not be selected due to their status as being in a protected group. For example, this might encourage more women to apply for an executive position that has only been given to men in the past.
The impact that disparate treatment has on businesses is vastly underrated. As stated previ...
... middle of paper ...
...at they and their children can have better lives. Furthermore, this reinforces the idea that the rule of law against disparate treatment helps the national GDP grow as these people bring in more labor and human resources which grow the economy. These people bring with them their culture and new ideas, enriching the United States with a cultural diversity and even more innovation.
Disparate treatment helps set our nation apart from others where not every group has the opportunity to advance themselves and they are stuck like “sticks in the mud”. Our nation can be viewed as a larger version of a “company” which, knowingly or not, competes with other nations in attracting the best and the brightest so that we ourselves can innovate. Perhaps the promise of innovating and improving ourselves to be the best we can be is the biggest impact that disparate treatment offers.
The size of an organization and applicant pool has a larger impact on determining disparate impact than actual discriminatory procedures (Jacobs et al. 457). For instance, there could have been such as small percentage of females who wanted to apply for the job that only a few were qualified for the position of the small pool. If 10 females applied and only 4 were qualified and were hired, while 54 out of 100 men who applied met the qualifications and were hired then this is evidence of disparate impact. A decision about 1 individual could determine if it’s a disparate impact case (GFB, 43). It would be unfair for the company to have to hire an additional woman if she did not meet the qualifications of job which can cause a liability to the company in the future, all for the sake of meeting the constraints of the 4/5ths
Disparate Impact arises when an employer's practices unintentionally excludes a protected class disproportionately (Player, Shoben and Lieberwitz, 1995). A "protected class" is a group of people, with common characteristics, which Congress has determined must be protected from inequality ("On-the-Job Discrimination: Gender Discrimination," 2004). This paper will analyze the landmark disparate impact case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (401 U.S. 424, 1971) from its beginning to its conclusion in the Supreme Court. Included will be the facts of the case and the issues detailed, as well as the history of the case from initial filing to final ruling.
In today’s world, the American still has barriers to overcome in the matter of racial equality. Whether it is being passed over for a promotion at the job or being underpaid, some people have to deal with unfair practice that would prevent someone of color or the opposite sex from having equal opportunity at the job. In 2004, Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores Incorporation was a civil rights class-action suite that ruled in favor of the women who worked and did not received promotions, pay and certain job assignments. This proves that some corporations ignore the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which protects workers from discrimination based on sex, race, religion or national origin.
The policy of affirmative action was created to promote equal opportunity in the workfield, however the policy has its own issues as it has produced lots of controversies since its inception. In particular, opponents of Affirmative action argues against the real effects of affirmative action and skeptical whether societal disparities in employment opportunities and incomes were simply the outcome of socioeconomic labelling, hence the effectiveness of affirmative action to address the disparities was also brought into questioning. Moreover the policy is also controversial in that it does, to a certain extent, exert discriminatory racial tension because it discriminates against non-minority groups. Therefore this essay will discuss some of the issues related to the controversial policy as well as explore some of the underlying causes of the policy and assessment of some of its measured benefits.
Discrimination, in one form or another, goes on everyday in the world around us. Discrimination affects all of us whether we are aware of it or not. Discrimination is defined as “unjustified differential treatment, especially on the basis of characteristics such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or religion” (MacKinnon). According to Eugene Lee of California Labor and Employment Law “racial discrimination and racial harassment” are the most popular complaint when it come to discrimination in the United States.
Works Cited Page Affirmative Action: Part 1 Enforcing Equality, " An Affirmative Action Primer", The Virginia Pilot. 1995. Pilot Online. 12, September 1998. Heilman, Madeline. Study: Affirmative Action Hires Abilities Doubted @. Money Magazine, Aug. 31, 1992, 3B. Kahlenberg, Richard D. The Remedy. New York; BasicBooks, 1996. M., Marsha. "Untitled". Tidewater Community College. November, 1998. Roberts, Paul Craig., and Lawrence M. Stratton. The New Color Line. Washington, DC; Regnery Publishing, 1995.
Institutions in the businesses sector are swarming in racial discrimination, much of which is covert and difficult to detect and prove. Racial discrimination excludes, marginalizes and exploits those citizens who are discriminated against, ceasing any opportunity for economic progress and development. Under certain regulations some businesses are required to diversify their workplace by hiring certain amounts of people of color, but in reality these small quotas do not do much for the overall condition of the people who are being discriminated against. Businesses that fail to take action on racial discrimination tend to have lower levels of productivity. This stems from employees not being interested in working hard, or because people with exceptional talents and skills choose to shy away from certain places of employment due to the fear of racial discrimination. Employees who feel wronged also tend to switch jobs, forcing the organization to spend more time and resources on hiring and training new employees, besides coping with the low productivity of a new employee. (Nayab)The effects of racial discrimination in the American work force could be identified with funded research on the topic. With ample data employers will be able to better understand the negative affects that racial discrimination have
Disparate treatment is a form of discrimination that is forbidden by laws in which all employers must comply, including fire and emergency services. Disparate treatment in the workplace is applicable to many functions of the workplace including, discipline, promotions, hiring, firing, benefits, layoffs, and testing (Varone, 2012). The claim of disparate treatment arises when a person or group, “is treated differently because of a prohibited classification” (Varone, 2012, p. 439). In the 2010 case, Lewis v. City of Chicago, six plaintiffs accused the city of disparate treatment following testing for open positions within the Chicago Fire Department (Lewis v. City of Chicago, 2010). The case is based on the argument that the Chicago Fire Department firefighter candidate testing, which was conducted in 1995, followed an unfair process of grouping eligible candidates, therefore discriminating against candidates of African-American decent. The case was heard by the Seventh District Court of Appeals and ultimately appeared before the United States Supreme Court, where Justice Scalia delivered the final verdict in favor of the plaintiffs.
For years society has believed the words Thomas Jefferson wrote stating “All men are created equal”, however, this is an unattainable ideal in our nation. Generation after generation, people have advocated that every man and woman is born into the world with the same abilities and chances to succeed in life. In spite of that, a large population of the country is denied and restricted from reaching their full potential. Each and every person is born with different financial situations, as well as different ethnic backgrounds that affect their path in life. These factors shape and impact the options people are granted in life, as well as the hardships they face, causing for people to have higher success rates than others. Racial injustices combined
The transformation of affirmative action over the years is generally considered a negative and socially unfair one. Although the original intention of such programs with regard to minority management was one of an undeniably just nature, my research has clearly indicated that over the years, various legal trends have drastically altered the socio-political implications of affirmative action often creating unfair situations for white males who are not part o...
Discrimination is still a chronic global issue, and drastic inequalities still exist at the present time. Thus, the Affirmative Action Law is an important tool to many minorities most especially to women, and people of color, for the reason that this program provides an equality on educational, and professional opportunities for every qualified individual living in the United States. Without this program, a higher education would have been impossible for a “minority students” to attain. Additionally, without the Affirmative Action, a fair opportunity to have a higher-level career...
Discrimination is known to exist in all workplaces, sometimes it is too subtle to notice, and other times it is exceedingly obvious. It is known that everyone subconsciously discriminates, dependant on their own beliefs and environments that surround them. However, discrimination can be either positive or negative in their results, and sometimes discrimination is a necessary part of life.
Introduction- Discrimination affects people all over the world. People of all ethnicities and from all different walks of life are influenced in some way by workplace discrimination. "Discrimination" means unequal treatment. One of the most common elements discriminated against is a persons ethnicity, or their race. This is called Racial Discrimination. While there are many federal laws concerning discrimination, most states have enacted laws that prohibit it. These laws may have different remedies than the federal laws and may, in certain circumstances be more favorable than the federal laws.
... institutions—such as government and large private companies—therefore they are usually the ones practicing institutional discrimination. Structural discrimination has a negative impact on minority groups and is difficult to avoid when dealing with jobs and money issues. Unlike the other two levels, structural discrimination is unintentional and legal. The minority group is the most likely to lose jobs when businesses need to lay off employers, and they are the most likely to not get a loan because they generally have lower incomes. The negative effect of structural discrimination on minority groups degrades both their position in society and their mental and physical health. The reason the lives of minority groups are unhealthier than dominant groups is because of the discriminatory policies—either well intentioned or bad intentioned—that are set in place.
Stigmatization: Affirmative action policies can and does create a stigma that minorities and women obtain positions in a company based on gender, race or ethnicity, rather than