griggs v. duke power company which prohibits course hero

What did Griggs vs Duke Power do?

The ruling effectively forbids employers from using arbitrary tests—such as those for measuring IQ or literacy—to evaluate an employee or a potential employee, a practice that some companies at the time were using as a way to get around rules that forbid outright racial discrimination.

What did the Griggs v Duke Power Co Case hold?

Conclusion: It was held that the Civil Rights Act prohibits an employer from requiring a high school education or passing of a standardized general intelligence test as a condition of employment in or transfer to jobs when the test is not unrelated to job performance and continues a discriminatory practice.

What was the main outcome of the Supreme Court case of Griggs v Duke Power quizlet?

1971: Griggs v. Duke Power Co. the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits not only intentional job discrimination, but also employer practices that have a discriminatory effect on minorities and women.

What is disparate impact theory?

disparate impact, also called adverse impact, judicial theory developed in the United States that allows challenges to employment or educational practices that are nondiscriminatory on their face but have a disproportionately negative effect on members of legally protected groups.

What was the impact of the Griggs v Duke Power Co decision on the employer?

Yes. After noting that Title VII of the Act intended to achieve equality of employment opportunities, the Court held that Duke's standardized testing requirement prevented a disproportionate number of African-American employees from being hired by, and advancing to higher-paying departments within, the company.

What did affirmative action do?

Affirmative action is defined as a set of procedures designed to; eliminate unlawful discrimination among applicants, remedy the results of such prior discrimination, and prevent such discrimination in the future.

In which case was it ruled that employment tests must measure the person for the specific job for which he or she is applying?

Explanation: Griggs v. Duke Power Company was a landmark Supreme Court case used to define unfair discrimination as put forth in EEO laws such as Title VII. The Court ruled that employment practices must be job related and that discrimination does not have to be overt to be illegal.

What is the 4/5th rule?

The Four-Fifths rule states that if the selection rate for a certain group is less than 80 percent of that of the group with the highest selection rate, there is adverse impact on that group.

What was the Griggs v Duke Power Co case?

Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. It concerned employment discrimination and the disparate impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971. It is generally considered the first case of its type.

When did Duke Power start hiring black employees?

In the 1950s Duke Power 's Dan River Steam Station in North Carolina had a policy restricting black employees to its "Labor" department, where the highest-paying position paid less than the lowest-paying position in the four other departments. In 1955 the company added the requirement of a high school diploma for employment in any department other ...

What was the Ginsburg dissent in Ricci v. DeStefano?

Justice Ginsburg 's dissent in Ricci v. DeStefano suggests that the Griggs conclusion (that Congress aimed beyond "disparate treatment"; it targeted "disparate impact" as well and proscribed not only overt discrimination but also practices that are fair in form, but discriminatory in operation) has been effectively overturned by the Ricci decision.

What is the disparate impact test?

The Supreme Court ruled that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, if such tests disparately impact ethnic minority groups, businesses must demonstrate that such tests are "reasonably related" to the job for which the test is required . Because Title VII was passed pursuant to Congress's power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, the disparate impact test later articulated by the Supreme Court in Washington v. Davis, 426 US 229 (1976) is inapplicable. (The Washington v. Davis test for disparate impact is used in constitutional equal protection clause cases, while Title VII's prohibition on disparate impact is a statutory mandate.)

What is the purpose of Title VII?

As such, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment tests (when used as a decisive factor in employment decisions) that are not a "reasonable measure of job performance," regardless of the absence of actual intent to discriminate.

What did the Supreme Court rule about the employment requirements of black employees?

The Supreme Court ruled that the company's employment requirements did not pertain to applicants' ability to perform the job, and so were unintentionally discriminating against black employees. The judgment famously held that " Congress has now provided that tests or criteria for employment or promotion may not provide equality of opportunity merely in the sense of the fabled offer of milk to the stork and the fox ."

Why was the literacy test barred in North Carolina?

United States, 395 U.S. 285 (1969). There, because of the inferior education received by Negroes in North Carolina, this Court barred the institution of a literacy test for voter registration on the ground that the test would abridge the right to vote indirectly on account of race.

What was the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co.?

(1971), a case presenting a challenge to a power company’s requirement that employees pass an intelligence test and obtain a high-school diploma to transfer out of its lowest-paying department. Prior to 1965 African Americans could be hired only by the…

What was the Supreme Court ruling in the Duke Power case?

By a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the tests given by Duke Power were artificial and unnecessary and that the requirements for transfer had a disparate impact on blacks.

Why did the Duke Power Company sue?

The background of the Griggs case began in the early 1970s, when African American workers at the Duke Power Company in North Carolina sued the company because of a rule that required employees who were transferring between different departments to have a high-school diploma or pass an intelligence test.

When did the Supreme Court issue the Griggs v. Duke Power decision?

In 1971, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Griggs v. Duke Power, which transformed our nation’s work places.

What did Duke Power do to stop discrimination?

Shortly after Congress passed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which made it illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of race, Duke Power stopped expressly restricting African-Americans to the labor department and announced new standards for hiring, promotion, and transfers. In order to work in positions outside of the labor department, Duke Power now required a high school diploma or scores on standardized IQ tests equal to those of the average high school graduate. These new requirements were not an improvement, however. They effectively perpetuated the discriminatory policies that Duke Power had utilized prior to the enactment of Title VII. Although the testing and diploma criteria disqualified African-Americans at a substantially higher rate than whites, Duke Power never established that they successfully measured ability to do the jobs in question. Indeed, the white employees hired before the requirements were imposed performed entirely satisfactorily.

What is Title VII?

It held that Title VII “proscribes not only overt discrimination but also practices that are fair in form, but discriminatory in operation.”.

What was the impact of the 1991 Civil Rights Act?

LDF’s victory therefore continues to ensure that employees may challenge not only overt discrimination but also job-selection procedures “that operate as ‘built-in headwinds’ for minority groups and are unrelated to measuring job capability.”

What is required to work at Duke Power?

In order to work in positions outside of the labor department, Duke Power now required a high school diploma or scores on standardized IQ tests equal to those of the average high school graduate.

Did Duke Power test African Americans?

Although the testing and diploma criteria disqualified African-Americans at a substantially higher rate than whites, Duke Power never established that they successfully measured ability to do the jobs in question. Indeed, the white employees hired before the requirements were imposed performed entirely satisfactorily.

Who was Thurgood Marshall's successor?

In December 1970, Jack Greenberg, who succeeded Thurgood Marshall as President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF), presented argument in the Supreme Court on behalf of the African-American employees.

What is the significance of Griggs v. Duke Power Co?

is an early and important case discussing the need to eradicate not only discriminatory treatment in the workplace, but also race-neutral polices that have a discriminatory impact.

What was the Duke Power Company's policy before the Civil Rights Act?

Before the Civil Rights Act became effective in 1965, the Duke Power Company in North Carolina openly discriminated against African-American employees by allowing them to only work in the lowest paid division of the Company.

Why did Duke Power sue?

Duke Power Co.: A group of African-American employees sued their employer, Duke Power Company, for a policy that mandated a high school diploma and satisfactory scores on two general aptitude tests in order to advance in the company.

What did the Supreme Court say about race neutral policies?

The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed. The Court held that even race-neutral policies that may show no discriminatory intent, still may be discriminatory in operation. It found that the high school and testing requirements indeed had a disproportionate negative impact on the African-American employees’ ability to advance. Therefore, those requirements violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Why did the lower courts find no violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act?

They reasoned that because the high school and testing requirements applied to all races the Company had no discriminatory intent.

What did the company require after 1965?

After 1965, the Company required a high school diploma and satisfactory scores on two professionally prepared aptitude tests for employees to advance to higher divisions. The aptitude tests were not tied to any specific job-related skills.

What was the purpose of Title VII?

Congress’ objective in enacting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was equality of employment opportunities and the removal of barriers that previously favored white employees. Accordingly, employer policies that appear race neutral but result in keeping a status quo that continues to discriminate against African-American employees violates the Act.

What was the burden of establishing a discriminatory intent behind an employment requirement before Griggs?

Before Griggs, the employee or applica nt had the burden of establishing a discriminatory intent behind an employment requirement. Following this decision, plaintiffs had only to prove discriminatory impact from hiring or advancement standards to succeed. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 codified this standard.

Why has Congress not commanded that the less qualified be preferred over the better qualified?

Congress has not commanded that the less qualified be preferred over the better qualified simply because of minority origins.

When employment requirements have a disparate impact on minorities and are not related to successful job performance, they violate?

When employment requirements have a disparate impact on minorities and are not related to successful job performance, they violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 even when there is no discriminatory intent.

Who is the plaintiff in the Civil Rights Act?

Griggs (Plaintiff) was an African American employee of Duke Power Co. (Defendant) who challenged Defendant’s job requirements as a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act because they disparately impacted African American applicants and were not tied to job performance.

Which bill protects the employer's right to insist that any prospective applicant, Negro or white, must meet the?

Senators Case of New Jersey and Clark of Pennsylvania, comanagers of the bill on the Senate floor, issued a memorandum explaining that the proposed Title VII "expressly protects the employer's right to insist that any prospective applicant, Negro or white, must meet the applicable job qualifications.

Who argued the cause for petitioners?

Jack Greenberg argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were James M. Nabrit III, Norman C. Amaker, William L. Robinson, Conrad O. Pearson, Julius LeVonne Chambers, and Albert J. Rosenthal.

How many whites passed the Wonderlic test?

Similarly, with respect to standardized tests, the EEOC in one case found that use of a battery of tests, including the Wonderlic and Bennett tests used by the Company in the instant case, resulted in 58% of whites passing the tests, as compared with only 6% of the blacks.

Why was the literacy test barred in North Carolina?

United States, 395 U.S. 285 (1969). There, because of the inferior education received by Negroes in North Carolina, this Court barred the institution of a literacy test for voter registration on the ground that the test would abridge the right to vote indirectly on account of race.

What test did the coal company pass in 1965?

In September 1965 the Company began to permit incumbent employees who lacked a high school education to qualify for transfer from Labor or Coal Handling to an "inside" job by passing two tests - the Wonderlic Personnel Test , which purports to measure general intelligence, and the Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test.

What did the Court of Appeals say about the racial discrimination?

The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court in part, rejecting the holding that residual discrimination arising from prior employment practices was insulated from remedial action. 4 The Court of Appeals noted, however, that the District Court was correct in its conclusion that there was no showing of a racial purpose or invidious intent in the adoption of the high school diploma requirement or general intelligence test and that these standards had been applied fairly to whites and Negroes alike. It held that, in the absence of a discriminatory purpose, use of such requirements was permitted by the Act. In so doing, the Court of Appeals rejected the claim that because these two requirements operated to render ineligible a markedly disproportionate number of Negroes, they were unlawful under Title VII unless shown to be job related. 5 We granted the writ on these claims. 399 U.S. 926 .

What was the purpose of Title VII?

It was to achieve equality of employment opportunities and remove [401 U.S. 424, 430] barriers that have operated in the past to favor an identifiable group of white employees over other employees. Under the Act, practices, procedures, or tests neutral on their face, and even neutral in terms of intent, cannot be maintained if they operate to "freeze" the status quo of prior discriminatory employment practices.

Overview

Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. It concerned employment discrimination and the disparate impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971. It is generally considered the first case of its type.
The Supreme Court ruled that the company's employment requirements did not pertain to applic…

Facts

Judgment

Significance

See also

Notes

External links