Dunlap vs Tennesee Valley
Read the Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority case. You are to write a 3-4 page report that answers the following questions: 1.What were the legal issues in this case?
David Dunlap brought suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging racial discrimination by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). The district court found that Dunlap had been subjected to discrimination under both disparate treatment and disparate impact analyses, concluding that the TVA’s subjective hiring processes permitted racial bias to both Dunlap and other black job applicants to occur. The TVA appealed, arguing that the district court erred in each of these analyses. David Dunlap is a 52 year old black man who has worked as a boilermaker and boilermaker foreman for over twenty years. Most of his work experience has been with TVA through contract or temporary work through his union. He has tried to gain permanent employment with TVA since the 1970s’ to no avail. He applied for a position and submitted his resume and application for a job opening at TVA as a boilermaker. Dunlap was not chosen for the position and he brought suit against TVA. Dunlap alleges that the interview process was biased and TVA selected less qualified candidates some of whom had family affiliations to the Cuberland selection committee members. 2.Explain why the plaintiff's disparate (adverse) impact claim fail?
The disparate impact theory requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that a facially neutral employment practice falls more harshly on one group than another and that the practice is not justified by business necessity. The disparate impact theory requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that a facility neutral employment practice falls more harshly on one group than another and that the practice is not justified by business necessity. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA)
David Dunlap brought suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging racial discrimination by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). The district court found that Dunlap had been subjected to discrimination under both disparate treatment and disparate impact analyses, concluding that the TVA’s subjective hiring processes permitted racial bias to both Dunlap and other black job applicants to occur. The TVA appealed, arguing that the district court erred in each of these analyses. David Dunlap is a 52 year old black man who has worked as a boilermaker and boilermaker foreman for over twenty years. Most of his work experience has been with TVA through contract or temporary work through his union. He has tried to gain permanent employment with TVA since the 1970s’ to no avail. He applied for a position and submitted his resume and application for a job opening at TVA as a boilermaker. Dunlap was not chosen for the position and he brought suit against TVA. Dunlap alleges that the interview process was biased and TVA selected less qualified candidates some of whom had family affiliations to the Cuberland selection committee members. 2.Explain why the plaintiff's disparate (adverse) impact claim fail?
The disparate impact theory requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that a facially neutral employment practice falls more harshly on one group than another and that the practice is not justified by business necessity. The disparate impact theory requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that a facility neutral employment practice falls more harshly on one group than another and that the practice is not justified by business necessity. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA)