Paragraph 1625.7(b)(2) of the proposed rule noted that, in the typical disparate-impact case, an employer has used an objective, non-age factor and the inquiry focuses on reasonableness. Relying on v. however, it also said that employers are subject to liability under disparate-impact analysis for granting supervisors unchecked discretion to engage in subjective decision making because the unchecked discretion allows conscious or unconscious age-based stereotypes to infect the decision-making process and,
. Q. The Uniform Guidelines apply to the requirements of Federal law prohibiting employment practices which discriminate on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. However, records are required to be kept only by sex and by specified race and ethnic groups. How can adverse impact be determined for religious groups and for national origin groups other than those specified in Section 4B of the Guidelines?
71. Restatement (Second) of Torts, 298 cmt. b (1965) (“The greater the danger, the greater the care which must be exercised.”).
Plaintiff Pedro Santiago also raised a retaliation claim under Title VII, contending that Xerox had terminated him because he had previously complained that he was being discriminated against because he is Hispanic. Noting that the plaintiff&aposs most recent complaint was made four years before he was terminated, the court held that the plaintiff had not established any causal connection between his protected activity under Title VII and his termination. Id. at 202.Twelve of the plaintiffs timely filed a notic
This distinction supports the aims of disparate impact. The prima faciestage only identifies a disparity-causing policy. The second stage offers the employer the opportunity to prove that the discriminatory policy falls within the subset of policies that Title VII is willing to tolerate on the basis of business necessity. such, the second stage requires a more robust consideration of the policy’s significance to business interests a mere relation is not necessarily sufficient to permit discrimination.