Paper Example on Baker and Associates Case

Introduction

The case on Baker and Associates induces the relevance of using statistical evidence to demonstrate the biased pattern that varies significantly from the labor pool configuration. The case shows conformity of statistical composition of initial and successful applicants after the third stage of 0.4 and 0.6 for Caucasians and African-Americans. Not only should the claimant prove membership to the minority group, but possession of the sought qualification. The statistical evidence could indicate the assertion of legitimate non-disciplinary reason to cover-up the condition limiting the participation of the minority.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Discrimination in Aviation Airlines under Title VII

The assertion of the figures to indicate discriminatory selection process is not sufficient to win their case as shown in Green v. McDonnell Douglas Corp. The court dismissed similar allegations for failure to indicate the percentage of qualified applicants. Similarly, the court dismissed the case in United States v. ILA ruling out racial composition, but rather the number of applicants. The racial statistics of Hispanics should not equate imbalance with discrimination since other test requirements such as inferiority in skills may explain the low number of Hispanics recruited. The statistical evidence is inconclusive unless the applicants illustrate the substantial difference in the recruitment pattern of minorities evident in NAACP Inc. v. Beecher in the Boston Chapter.

Greg Hammond Case

The case compels the demonstration of a disparate impact from an employment practice, though neutral, causes a discriminatory outcome. It compels the application of McDonnell Douglas test that requires the plaintiff to challenge the employment practice for causing the exclusion of applicants. A plaintiff could demonstrate that the decision by Greg Hammond to place a single advertisement for the positions to save on money. Merging the advertisement locked out qualified applicants from the second position despite satisfying the requirements.

CPI Incorporated

Rejecting the Hispanic applicant citing previous conviction on criminal offense violates the Ban-the-box laws and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII prevents employers from practices that screen applicants from their criminal history when it significantly disadvantages protected individuals, including Hispanics and African-Americans. The overlooked Hispanic applicant could allege the violation of Title VII provisions since CPI Incorporated cannot accurately decide the reliability and responsibility of the person.

Columbo's Cantaloupes

The evokes the voluntary affirmative action provided for under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (1964) mandating employers to correct prior discriminatory practices through affirmative actions. However, employers should embrace the court ruling in Griggs V. Duke Powe to correct the artificial limitation by eliminating barriers that historically prevented women from promotions. The affirmative action should realize provisions under the Equal Pay Act (EPA) and Title VII that illegalizes discrimination from sex when awarding benefits to employees.

Four-Fifth Rule

The difference in the successful selection is likely cited as occurring by chance in a small number of individuals. A swap of candidates selected would alter the statistics unlike when dealing with nationwide statistics. The four-fifth rule would indicate previous convictions disqualifies 10% African-Americans and only 4% of whites at shows 90/96 - 94%. Its application in large statistics, particularly, the national population would deliver a huge difference unlike in a small sample at 2%.