Disparate Impact/Disparate Treatment Case Study
Any Student
Business Law
Any Instructor
Any Date
 

Disparate Impact/Disparate Treatment Case Study

 Disparate treatment occurs when a protected class member is treated differently from others, whether or not there is discriminatory intent; whereas disparate impact occurs when employment decisions work to the disadvantage of all of the protected class members whether or not there is discriminatory intent.  The EEO Title VII prohibits employers from treating employees differently because of their membership in a protected class.  Likewise, Title VII prohibits the employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on all members of a protected class.  Legal guidelines designed to identify disparate treatment/impact are, at best, vague (Hr Guide, 2005).
 Cases originally filed as disparate treatment often become disparate impact cases by way of appeal after appeal.  The disparate treatment case of Raytheon Company v. Hernandez is a good illustration of the aforementioned fact.  Joel Hernandez worked for Raytheon (and its predecessor company) for 25 years until he tested positive for cocaine use.  His drug use violated company workplace conduct rules, so the company gave him the option to resign or be involuntarily terminated.  Hernandez resigned, and the company put a note in his personnel file, which stated that he quit in lieu of being fired for misconduct.  Two years later, Hernandez reapplied to be rehired by Raytheon.  He claimed to be rehabilitated.  Raytheon, however, had a "no rehire" policy for former employees who had been terminated for workplace misconduct.  ...