Case Study: Dunlap V. Tennessee Valley Authority
Assignment #2
Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority
Dr. Edward Sherbert
HRM 510
May 5, 2013
What where the legal issues in this case? The Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects individuals against employment discrimination on the bases of color, as well as national origin, sex, religion. This law applies to any employers with 15 or more employees including the local state, government, employment agencies, labor organizations and federal government jobs. David Dunlap a fifty-two black male who worked as a boil maker for twenty years has perform numerous of jobs for Tennessee Valley Authority and decided to interview for one of the ten position that TVA had available at the Cumberland facility. …show more content…
“Dunlap did not present evidence that the practice can show that a protected group was adversely impacted.” Since he could not prove his claim by challenging the process used in his own interview the courts decided that the disparate impact claim would not be enough sufficient evidence to use against Tennessee Valley …show more content…
Secondly, I think that the Tennessee Valley Authority should have really sat down and analyze each candidate that was applying for the ten positions. With this company only have a select ten positions available the hiring managers should have been very specific with the candidates that should be chosen. They should have compared and contrasts the advantages and disadvantages of each candidate upon calling them to set up an interview. They should have taken some time to look at each application to cross out the ones that did not meet the characteristic that were initially brought about. Race should not have ever been a factor and seeking candidates to fill all ten open positions. Regardless of anyone’s race the job still has to be completed. Everyone should have been given a fair chance for any position available. They could have also given everyone a trial period to let their performance speak for itself. I think that each candidate should have been given a fair opportunity to be rewarded with a job with Tennessee Valley Authority. So many companies try to use and abuse you as long as you will let them; Dunlap felt that he had an equal chance to get hired on with this company in which he had been
Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority
Dr. Edward Sherbert
HRM 510
May 5, 2013
What where the legal issues in this case? The Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects individuals against employment discrimination on the bases of color, as well as national origin, sex, religion. This law applies to any employers with 15 or more employees including the local state, government, employment agencies, labor organizations and federal government jobs. David Dunlap a fifty-two black male who worked as a boil maker for twenty years has perform numerous of jobs for Tennessee Valley Authority and decided to interview for one of the ten position that TVA had available at the Cumberland facility. …show more content…
“Dunlap did not present evidence that the practice can show that a protected group was adversely impacted.” Since he could not prove his claim by challenging the process used in his own interview the courts decided that the disparate impact claim would not be enough sufficient evidence to use against Tennessee Valley …show more content…
Secondly, I think that the Tennessee Valley Authority should have really sat down and analyze each candidate that was applying for the ten positions. With this company only have a select ten positions available the hiring managers should have been very specific with the candidates that should be chosen. They should have compared and contrasts the advantages and disadvantages of each candidate upon calling them to set up an interview. They should have taken some time to look at each application to cross out the ones that did not meet the characteristic that were initially brought about. Race should not have ever been a factor and seeking candidates to fill all ten open positions. Regardless of anyone’s race the job still has to be completed. Everyone should have been given a fair chance for any position available. They could have also given everyone a trial period to let their performance speak for itself. I think that each candidate should have been given a fair opportunity to be rewarded with a job with Tennessee Valley Authority. So many companies try to use and abuse you as long as you will let them; Dunlap felt that he had an equal chance to get hired on with this company in which he had been