nerdexam
HRCI

PHR · Question #6

As a HR Professional you must be familiar with several different lawsuits and their affect on human resource practices today. This adverse impact lawsuit determined that discrimination need not be del

The correct answer is A. Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) established the doctrine of disparate impact, holding that facially neutral employment practices can constitute unlawful discrimination without proof of discriminatory intent.

Basic Database Administration and Security

Question

As a HR Professional you must be familiar with several different lawsuits and their affect on human resource practices today. This adverse impact lawsuit determined that discrimination need not be deliberate or observable to be real. Employees were segregated by race and were allowed to work only in the lowest paid position. What lawsuit is described?

Options

  • AGriggs versus Duke Power, 1971
  • BAlbemarle Paper versus Moody, 1975
  • CWashington versus Davis, 1976
  • DMcDonnell Douglas Corp. versus Green, 1973

How the community answered

(43 responses)
  • A
    79% (34)
  • B
    2% (1)
  • C
    7% (3)
  • D
    12% (5)

Why each option

Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) established the doctrine of disparate impact, holding that facially neutral employment practices can constitute unlawful discrimination without proof of discriminatory intent.

AGriggs versus Duke Power, 1971Correct

In Griggs v. Duke Power, the Supreme Court ruled that Duke Power's use of high school diploma requirements and general intelligence tests unlawfully excluded Black employees who had been confined to the lowest-paid Labor Department. The Court established that discrimination need not be deliberate or observable - if a neutral employment practice has an adverse impact on a protected class and is not justified by business necessity, it violates Title VII.

BAlbemarle Paper versus Moody, 1975

Albemarle Paper v. Moody (1975) addressed the validation requirements for pre-employment tests and back pay remedies, not the foundational definition of disparate impact.

CWashington versus Davis, 1976

Washington v. Davis (1976) was a constitutional case that actually required proof of discriminatory intent for equal protection claims, moving in the opposite direction from Griggs.

DMcDonnell Douglas Corp. versus Green, 1973

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) established the burden-shifting framework for individual disparate treatment claims, not the broader doctrine of adverse impact discrimination.

Concept tested: Griggs v. Duke Power disparate impact doctrine

Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/questions-and-answers-clarify-and-provide-common-interpretation-uniform-guidelines

Topics

#adverse impact#Griggs v Duke Power#disparate impact#racial segregation

Community Discussion

No community discussion yet for this question.

Full PHR Practice