Search results

While the words diversity, disparate impact, and discrimination are commonly read and heard by working adults and professionals, they can at times be confusing and fearful to some managers. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of a specific aspect of US civil rights laws – the disparate impact theory. The authors provide an analysis based on the statute, case law interpreting, and applying the statute, administrative guidelines from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, as well as legal and management commentary. The paper illustrates the requirements of a plaintiff employee’s initial case based on the disparate impact theory. The challenging causation component which requires some degree of statistical evidence is given particular attention. Limitations to the paper are stated at the beginning; and recommendations to managers are explored and provided toward the end of the paper.

It is a legal paper which covers all the laws related to discrimination based on disparate impact and disparate treatment theories. Actual court cases up until this month and Americans laws related to this concept are reviewed and critically discussed.

The salient feature of disparate impact is that this legal theory allows a plaintiff job applicant or employee to sustain a case of illegal discrimination without providing any evidence of a discriminatory motive. As opposed to the disparate treatment liability is imposed based on disproportionate adverse results and not discriminatory intent.

This paper deals with the disparate impact theory pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. However, it must be pointed out that the disparate impact theory is also applicable to claims arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Since the focus of this paper is Title VII federal and state constitutional issues, such as the applicability of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause that may arise in disparate impact cases involving government entities will not be addressed.

Managers and employees can protect themselves in the workplace from illegal discriminatory practices. Initially, employers and managers must be aware of the distinction between a disparate impact case and a disparate treatment case with the latter requiring evidence of intentional discrimination. Evidence, of course, can be direct or circumstantial or inferential. Whereas in a disparate impact case there is no intentional discrimination; and as such proof of discriminatory intent is not required. Rather, the employee has to present evidence that the employer’s neutral on-its-face employment policy or practice caused an adverse disproportionate impact on the employee as a member of a protected class.

Human resources professionals and managers must become educated in diversity laws in order to provide an inclusive workplace for all employees and candidates. Employers have legitimate areas of concern in hiring and promoting employees; and the courts are cognizant of employer responsibilities; and thus the employers must be able to show how specific knowledge, skills, education, training, backgrounds, as well as height, weight, strength, and dexterity are legitimate qualifications that directly relate to successful job performance.

This is an original paper by the authors.

Defines the two concepts before discussing disparate impact theory which is not cognisable under the US Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) through the use of case law. Lists the protected categories which are covered by disparate treatment and disparate impact law and cites the reasons under which a complaint can be made. Provides a suggested structure for addressing such claims within the company.

There are two grounds in the USA for bringing a claim of race or gender discrimination: discriminatory intent; and discriminatory effect. As to age discrimination, however, a plaintiff is allowed to bring a claim only on grounds of discriminatory intent. Argues that, with regard to age discrimination in the university, discriminatory effect and discriminatory intent are one: discriminatory intent is hidden inside certain employment practices which appear to be “facially neutral” but are not. In other words, stripped of its disguises discriminatory effect which persists is discriminatory intent. Identifies five strategies to disguise disparate treatment as disparate impact: resistance, pretense, evasion, denial and approval. Explains how a specific university employed these five strategies to hide its discriminatory intent behind discriminatory effect.

The article aims to provide a discussion of societal norms concerning “attractiveness,” the existence of appearance discrimination in employment, the presence of “preferring the pretty”, and then the authors examine important civil rights laws that relate to such forms of discrimination. Finally, the authors apply ethical theories to determine whether such discrimination can be seen as moral or immoral.

It is a legal paper which covers all the laws related to discrimination based on look. Court cases and Americans laws related to this concept are reviewed and critically discussed.

The paper finds that appearance‐based discrimination is not illegal in the USA so long as it does not violate civil rights laws.

This research is limited to Federal and State laws in the USA and may not be relevant in other countries as the local laws might vary.

Managers and employees can protect themselves in the workplace from illegal discriminatory practices.

Employees know their rights and enhance their understanding of laws related to appearance, attractiveness, and why companies look to hire those who are considered “handsome”, “pretty” and “beautiful”.

This is an original and comprehensive paper by the authors.

Outlines the four fifths rule in discrimination cases citing areas of its use in personnel actions. Provides case laws examples. Considers in particular a case against Pepsi‐Cola. Concludes with some criticisms of the concept.

This chapter suggests that social justice for African Americans during the era of Obama presidency will advance less from what Mr. Obama does and more from what social scientists and others do. President Obama is not expected to provide much leadership on this issue for at least four reasons. First, presidents and other high-level elected officials do not tend to make policy without strong public advocacies for such policies. Second, Mr. Obama has put forth a universal rather than a targeted approach to dealing with issues concerning African Americans. Third, he is unlikely to use his bully pulpit to advance social justice for African Americans because he has been reluctant to use the bully pulpit to advance his major legislative agenda. And fourth, the Obama administration has made a habit of fumbling on teachable moments about race. See the missteps in the Henry Louis Gates affair, and the timidity in the Shirley Sherrod and the Van Jones affairs.

This article looks at the relationship between human rights law and geography. Drawing from a meeting of the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), the article explores how the right to life was legally interpreted to apply to the loss of life associated with Hurricane Katrina. In particular, the article argues that the HRC’s legal interpretation of the right to life shifted as part of a discussion between the United States and nongovernmental organizations. The shift incorporated a more nuanced understanding of the spatial dimension of injustice by including preexisting inequalities and ongoing internal displacement in the analysis of human rights obligations related to the hurricane. The HRC meeting and the legal interpretations arising from that meeting therefore provide an example of Seyla Benhabib’s concept of “democratic iterations” as well as an example of how law can be “spatialized” through international legal processes.

Reveals that there is still, in most US cities, deep segregation of the racial kind, even though this has improved over latter times. Posits that while racists seem to have the power to decide who can live where and that real estate agents and federal housing official have only lent their support to this theme. States that racial segregation can be revealed by the use of zip codes in most areas. Sums up that mixed neighbourhoods with good amenities are most likely to remain stable, for both blacks and whites, and this should be promoted at every turn.

Purveyors of fake news perpetuate information that can harm society, including businesses. Social media's reach quickly amplifies distortions of fake news. Research has not yet fully explored the mechanisms of such adversarial behavior or the adversarial techniques of machine learning that might be deployed to detect fake news. Debiasing techniques are also explored to combat against the generation of fake news using adversarial data. The purpose of this paper is to present the challenges and opportunities in fake news detection.

First, this paper provides an overview of adversarial behaviors and current machine learning techniques. Next, it describes the use of long short-term memory (LSTM) to identify fake news in a corpus of articles. Finally, it presents the novel adversarial behavior approach to protect targeted business datasets from attacks.

This research highlights the need for a corpus of fake news that can be used to evaluate classification methods. Adversarial debiasing using IBM's Artificial Intelligence Fairness 360 (AIF360) toolkit can improve the disparate impact of unfavorable characteristics of a dataset. Debiasing also demonstrates significant potential to reduce fake news generation based on the inherent bias in the data. These findings provide avenues for further research on adversarial collaboration and robust information systems.

Adversarial debiasing of datasets demonstrates that by reducing bias related to protected attributes, such as sex, race and age, businesses can reduce the potential of exploitation to generate fake news through adversarial data.

Outlines a brief history of the position of women in the fire fighting industry and the views held by some sectors. Briefly defines sex discrimination and then discusses a number of cases filed against various fire fighting organisations in the US. Gives examples of where barriers are actively being removed and looks at the changes from a managerial viewpoint. Concludes that this industry is an area for concern and immediate improvements need to be made to avoid future litigation.