Workplace Discrimination and the Law

discuss how workplace discrimination can impact the future of your chosen career. Finally, we want to discuss how candidate selection is an important practice in developing a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace by providing your perspective on the Grigg v. Duke Power Co.; how would you decide this case? You will post your response to the prompt and reply to at least two other students.

1. How do candidate selection and workplace discrimination impact the future of your chosen career? (My major is accounting. Can you talk about Consequential Damages like definition and examples and if it is possible please briefly discuss the effect )

2. Provide your perspective on the Grigg v. Duke Power Co. (Links to an external site.); how would you decide on this case?

Griggs v. Duke Power Co.: Background

Griggs v. Duke Power Co. was a case argued in the early 1970s and decided on March 8, 1971, by the United States Supreme Court. It began when Willie Griggs, a Black employee of Duke Power Co., along with several other Black co-workers, found that the company requirements to transfer between departments were unethical. These requirements, although altered since, had a pre-civil rights era rule that Black employees were only allowed to work in their labor department, even though the company had numerous other departments. In comparison to these other departments, the pay for a position in the labor department was not equitable; labor employees often were paid a fraction of what other employees were paid in departments where Black employees were not allowed to work. After the Civil Rights Act of 1964, this rule ended, though it was replaced with a very specific set of rules for employee transfers between departments. The new rules stated that employees wishing to transfer (or people newly seeking a job in the company) must have earned a high school diploma OR must pass two tests: one based on general intelligence, and the other an aptitude test.

Many American men at this time did not hold high school diplomas, though Black men held disproportionately fewer high school diplomas than their white counterparts. Griggs and his team questioned the two tests and found that neither test was applicable to job duties in these other departments or to their potential performance in a role.

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund represented Griggs in this case. They argued that Black employees were at a major disadvantage due to their lower likelihood to have a high school diploma and subsequent less success in passing the given tests. In addition, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund used the tests against Duke Power, insisting that such tests should not be used to hire someone in another department; the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund further stated that the tests had no direct relation to those departments/jobs and therefore seemed rather arbitrary.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects people from being discriminated against in the workplace based on sex, race, gender, or nationality. As the Civil Rights Act was not widely enforced until 1965, many courts did not rule based on company practices in use prior to this time. Prior to the establishment of the rule that Griggs argued against in this case, during the 1950s the company had a rule that explicitly limited positions Black employees could hold in the company. This rule only allowed Black employees to work in one of the four total departments at the company. By the time the Civil Rights Act was passed, the limiting rule for Black employees was no longer a proper rule, though Black employees were still treated as though it remained in effect, leading to Griggs' pursuit of justice.

The 1950s-era rule was outside of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court for this case because it occurred before the Civil Rights Act was enacted. However, Griggs and his team still brought forth evidence of this policy in the case, as it established a long history of discriminatory treatment against Black individuals within the company. This rule, they argued, was a strong basis for discrimination that continued after the Civil Rights Act passed.

Title VII has specific guidelines as well regarding tests that became relevant during this case. The Supreme Court decided that tests are allowed to be given to employees, but that they must be based on specific job duties. Since the tests administered by Duke Power Co. at this time were not relevant to the job position(s) in question, they were in major violation of this act.

Griggs v. Duke Power Co.: Case Summary and Facts

The Supreme Court had a major responsibility in following through with this case since the Civil Rights Act was so new at the time. They had the task of ensuring that this act was carried out accurately and without any oversight issues. A few key facts were used in their deliberation and ultimate ruling:

• Willie Griggs was a Black employee of Duke Power Co.
• Griggs claimed in 1971 that Duke Power Co. unfairly discriminated against Black employees.
• Duke Power Co. maintained that it utilized the two tests that measured general intelligence and aptitude (but were not connected to specific job duties for positions within the company) because Duke Power wanted to increase the quality of the workplace.
• A district court and the court of appeals both found no discriminatory practices used by Duke Power Co. before the case was sent to the Supreme Court.

Griggs v. Duke Power Co.: Supreme Court Decision

The Supreme Court of 1971 decided in a unanimous vote that the test and high school diploma requirements were indeed in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Court also noted that white people at the time were significantly more likely circumstantially than Black people to fare well on the tests required by Duke Power Co. in order to receive a job, promotion, or raise. They attributed their decision, in part, to this fact; in tandem with the fact that Black employees had many fewer resources and were less likely to earn a high school diploma, Duke Power Co. could not defend themselves amply. To the Supreme Court, this was a clear violation of the Civil Rights Act due to its impact on Black people. Further, since the new rule disproportionately hurt a minority ethnic group, the Court ruled that any test that does so, even without intent, must be proven by the company requiring the test to be related to the job in some way.

Disparate Impact Significance

It was found that the employment requirements had negative effects on Black workers and job seekers in particular. This was included as a part of the Supreme Court's decision and was called disparate impact.

This idea was the first instance of such use in a major court case in the United States. It allows the judicial system to evaluate rules and practices that are not outwardly discriminatory but that have an inequitable impact on people in protected groups. This means that discrimination because of sex, race, gender, or nationality, even if unintentionally caused, is still subject to be brought to court due to its impact. As this case was the first to utilize this theory, Griggs v. Duke Power Co. became the landmark case that is referred to when studying disparate impact. Though this idea is sometimes argued against contemporarily, it is still utilized as necessary when discriminatory practices are called into question within the judicial system.

Lesson Summary

The Griggs v. Duke Power Co. summary is as follows: Willie Griggs discovered that white employees at Duke Power Co. were more likely to be promoted and received higher pay than Black employees. He decided to sue and was represented in this case by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. It was found that, due to employment requirements, Black employees were negatively affected. This was because Black employees at the time were both less likely to have a high school diploma and less likely to pass both tests that were necessary to receive a promotion or to transfer departments. This means that Black people in particular were the victims of unjust rules. The Supreme Court found that Duke Power Co. was in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and held the company accountable for holding Black people to inequitable standards. This case was notably one of the first to mention disparate impact, which is a term created to describe discrimination that occurs as a result of indirect practices. Disparate impact has been used multiple times since its appearance in Griggs v. Duke Power Co.