IMPACT OF LEGAL FACTORS ON PRODUCTIVITY, QUALITY
2. A brief illustration of types of conduct that might be prohibited by the policy.
3. A mechanism for reporting possible acts of retaliation.
4. A statement that complaints will be promptly investigated and resolved as appropriate.
5. A statement that complaints will be maintained as confidential to the extent practicable, given the need to investigate and resolve issues.
With respect to training, an effective program will include the following:
a. A straightforward description of the company’s anti-harassment policy.
b. Examples and stories to explain what acts could be viewed as retalia- tory, since retaliation might be even more difficult to define than harassment.
c. An explanation of the consequences of engaging in retaliation.
d. Practical steps and suggestions on how supervisors should vet possible actions toward protected employees with HR or legal counsel before acting.
Attorneys and HR professionals are well aware that it doesn’t take a strong discrimination case to make a strong retaliation case. In fact, it’s often the weak discrimination claim that produces the big-time retaliation lawsuit. Updated policies, effective training, and thoughtful attention to possible retaliatory actions by supervisors and higher-level managers can help safeguard an organi- zation from potential legal liability.
SUMMARY
Congress enacted the following laws to promote fair employment. They provide the basis for discrimination suits and subsequent judicial rulings:
� Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
� Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1871
� Equal Pay Act of 1963
� Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
� Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (as amended in 1986)
� Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
� Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
� Civil Rights Act of 1991
� Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
� Executive Orders 11246, 11375, and 11478
� Rehabilitation Act of 1973
� The Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Act of 1974
� Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) are the two major federal
regulatory agencies charged with enforcing these nondiscrimination laws. The EEOC is responsible both for private and public nonfederal employers, unions, and employment agencies. The OFCCP is responsible for ensuring compliance from government contractors and subcontractors.
A considerable body of case law has developed, affecting almost all aspects of the employment relationship. We discussed case law in the following areas:
� Sex discrimination, sexual harassment, reproductive hazards, and pregnancy
� Age discrimination
� National origin discrimination
� Seniority
� Testing and interviewing
� Personal history (specifically, pre-employment inquiries)
� Preferential selection
The bottom line in all these cases is that, as managers, we need to be very clear about job requirements and performance standards, we need to treat people as individuals, and we must evaluate each individual fairly relative to job requirements and performance standards.
IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT PRACTICE
A manager can easily feel swamped by the maze of laws, court rulings, and regulatory-agency pronouncements that organizations must navigate through. While it is true that in the foreseeable future there will con- tinue to be legal pressure to avoid unlawful discrimination, as we saw in Chapter 1, there will be great economic
pressure to find and retain top talent. Work- force diversity is a competitive necessity,
and employers know it. Progressive managers recognize that now is the time to begin developing the kinds of corporate policies and interpersonal skills that will enable them to operate effectively in diverse, multicultural work environments.
equal employment opportunity discrimination
unequal treatment direct evidence
circumstantial evidence mixed-motive cases
adverse-impact discrimination affirmative action
bona fide occupational qualifications prima facie case
race-norming
essential functions disability
qualified job applicant systemic discrimination contract compliance case law
sexual harassment quid pro quo harassment hostile-environment harassment seniority system
reverse discrimination
KEY TERMS
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
3–1. If you were asked to advise a private employer (with no government contracts) of its equal employment opportunity responsibilities, what would you say?
3–2. As a manager, what steps can you take to deal with the organizational impact of the Family and Medical Leave Act?
3–3. Prepare a brief outline of an organizational policy on sexual harassment. Be sure to include complaint, investigation, and enforcement procedures.
3–4. What steps would you take as a manager to ensure fair treatment for older employees?
3–5. Collect two policies on EEO, sexual harassment, or family and medical leave from two different employers in your area. How are they similar (or different)?
Which aspects of the policies support the appropriate law?
APPLYING YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Case 3–1 A Case of Harassment?
Erin Dempsey was working late trying to finish the analysis of the ticket report for her boss, Ron Hanson. The deadline was tomorrow, and she still had several hours of work to do before the analysis would be finished. Erin did not particularly enjoy working late, but she knew Ron would be expecting the report first thing in the morning. She had been working very hard recently, hoping that she would earn a promotion to senior travel agent at the large urban travel agency where she was employed. Getting the ticket report done on time would be absolutely essential for any promotion opportunities.
Matt Owens, a coworker at the travel agency, was also working late that evening.
Suddenly, he appeared in her office uninvited and sat down in the side chair. “Got a big date tonight, eh, Erin?” Matt said with a touch of sarcasm in his voice.
“I’m working very hard on the ticket report tonight Matt, and I really could use a bit of privacy.” Erin had sensed before that Matt was a pest, and she hoped that by being rather direct with him he would leave her alone.
“A cute chick like you shouldn’t waste a perfectly good Wednesday evening work- ing late.”
“Please, Matt, I’ve got work to do.”
“Oh come on, Erin. I’ve noticed the way you act when you walk by my office or when we pass in the halls. It’s clear that you’re dying to go out with me. Some things a guy can just sense. This is your big chance. I’ll tell you what. Let’s go to dinner at that new intimate French restaurant up on the hill. Afterwards we can stop by my place for some music, a fire in the fireplace, and a nightcap. I make a great Black Russian. What do you say?”
Erin was furious. “I say you’re an egotistical, self-centered, obnoxious, dirty old man. If you don’t get out of here right now, I’m going to call Ron Hanson at home and tell him that you’re keeping me from finishing the ticket report.”
“Oh my, you’re even sexier when you’re angry. I like that in a woman.”
Erin could see that she was getting nowhere fast with this approach, so she decided to leave the room in hopes that Matt would get the hint and go home. As she stormed through the door, Matt mockingly held the door ajar, said “After you, sweet thing,” and then patted Erin on the backside as she passed. Erin stopped in her tracks, turned to Matt, and said, “If you ever do that again, I’ll . . .” She was so mad that she couldn’t think of an appropriate threat. So instead she just stormed off down the hall and left the building.
The next morning, Erin was waiting in the office of Daryl Kolendich, the owner of the travel agency, when he arrived at work. Erin knew that Ron Hanson would probably
be angry that she had gone over his head to the agency owner, but she was so furious with Matt Owens that she wanted immediate action. She described the incident to Daryl and demanded that some sort of disciplinary action be taken with Matt.
“Now calm down, Erin. Let’s think through this problem a bit first. Isn’t it possible that you can handle this sort of problem yourself? Is it possible that you may in fact have been encouraging Matt to act this way? Look, I understand that you’re upset. I would be too, if I were in your shoes. But look at it this way. We’ve been hiring male travel agents for only the last few years now. Prior to that time there were only female agents, so problems like these never arose. Matt is from an older generation than yours.
It takes time for men like him to get used to working on an equal basis with women.
Can’t you just try to make sure over the next few weeks that you give him no encourage- ment at all? If you do, I’m sure this problem will take care of itself.”
Erin was not at all convinced. “But I did make it very clear I was not interested in him. It seemed to make him even more persistent. You’re the owner and the boss here, and I’ll do what you ask, but it seems to me that it’s your responsibility to make sure this kind of sexual harassment doesn’t take place in this agency.”
“Erin, has your supervisor Ron Hanson ever suggested that your job opportunities here would be improved if you went out with him? Have I ever in any way intimated that a date with me could lead to a promotion for you?”
Erin was silent. It was true that none of the management staff at the agency had been guilty of sexual harassment. In fact, both Ron and Daryl had been highly supportive of her work ever since she arrived. Her annual pay raises had been higher than those of most other coworkers, both male and female.
Daryl broke the silence. “I guess my point is that we don’t have a sexual harassment situation here. Please try what I’ve suggested and let me know in a couple of weeks if you feel it hasn’t worked.”
Questions
1. What is sexual harassment in the workplace? Was Matt Owens guilty of sexual
harassment?
2. If you were Erin Dempsey, what would you do?
3. What is an organization’s responsibility with respect to sexual harassment among
coworkers or supervisor-subordinate pairs? Do you think that Daryl Kolendich re- sponded appropriately to the problem?
4. Outline a brief policy that an organization could adopt to protect itself from sexual
harassment lawsuits.
REFERENCES
1. Von Drehle , D. Court mirrors public opinion. The Washington Post. n.d., www
.washingtonpost.com , June 24, 2003.
2. Player , M. A. ( 2004 ). Federal law of employment discrimination in a nutshell
(5th ed.). St. Paul, MN: West .
3. Friedman , A. ( 1972 ). Attacking discrimination through the Thirteenth Amend-
ment. Cleveland State Law Review , 21 , 165–178 .
4. Peikes , L. , & Mitchell , C. M. ( 2006 , Aug.). 2nd Circuit: Employee working abroad has no remedy for extraterritorial discriminatory conduct. HR News , p. 1 .
5. Johnson v. Railway Express Agency Inc. ( 1975 ). 95 S. Ct. 1716.
6. Smith , A. ( 2008 , May 27). Supreme Court permits retaliation claims under two more
federal laws . Downloaded from www.shrm.org/law/library on May 29, 2008.
7. Civil rights statutes extended to Arabs, Jews. ( 1987 , May 19). Daily Labor Report , pp. 1 , 2 , 6 .
8. Stites , J. ( 2005 , May). Equal pay for the sexes. HRMagazine , pp. 64–69 .
9. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/stats/epa.html ,
April 15, 2008.
10. Stites , J. ( 2005 , May). Equal pay for the sexes. HRMagazine , pp. 64–69 . See also Lunsford , J. L. ( 2004 , July 19). Boeing to change pay plan to settle sex-bias lawsuit.
The Wall Street Journal , p. B2 . Holmes , S. ( 2004 , Apr. 26). A new black eye for Boeing? BusinessWeek , pp. 90–92 .
11. Gamlem , C. ( 2007 , Oct.). Affirmative action plans for federal contractors. n.d., www.shrm.org , April 16, 2008. See also Bakke v. Regents of the University of California ( 1978 ). 17 FEPC 1000.
12. Thompson , C. ( 2008 , Mar.). Standard should not have been applied to hearing test.
HRMagazine , p. 88 .
13. Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters ( 1978 ). 438 U.S. 567.
14. McDonnell Douglas v. Green ( 1973 ). 411 U.S. 972.
15. Civil Rights Act of 1991, Public Law No. 102–166 , 105 Stat. 1071 ( 1991 ). Codified
as amended at 42 U.S.C., Section 1981, 2000e et seq.
16. Valenza , G. ( 1999 , Nov.–Dec.). The Supreme Court creates a safe harbor from
liability for punitive damages. Legal Report , pp. 5–8 . Washington, DC: Society for Human Resource Management .
17. Lau , S. ( 2008 , Feb.). U.S. laws abroad. HRMagazine , p. 33 .
18. Biskupic , J. ( 2008 , June 20). Court aids older workers alleging discrimination. USA
Today , p. 5A .
19. Pierson , G. C. , & Fulkerson , S. R. ( 1999 , Mar.–Apr.). The Older Workers Benefit Protection Act: Are waivers worth the paper they’re written on? Legal Report , pp. 5–8 . Washington, DC: Society for Human Resource Management .
20. EEOC proposes regulations on ADEA waivers. ( 1999 , July–Aug,). Legal Report ,
pp. 1–3 . Washington, DC: Society for Human Resource Management .
21. Parsons v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l Inc. , 8th Cir., No. 05–3496 ( 2006 , May 19).
22. Pitfalls of verifying a worker’s employment authorization: Are your I-9 forms up to
snuff? ( 1996 , Apr.). Bulletin. Denver: Mountain States Employers Council Inc. , p. 2 . See also Bradshaw , D. S. ( 1987 ). Immigration reform: This one’s for you. Personnel Administrator , 32 (4), 37–40 .
23. Ladika , S. ( 2006 , Oct.). Trouble on the hiring front. HRMagazine , pp. 56–61 .
24. Lurie , D. ( 2005 , Mar.). The I-9 form: everything HR professionals need to know
about the I-9 employment-verification process. n.d., www.shrm.org/hrresources/
whitepapers_published/CMS_011693.asp , April 15, 2008.
25. U.S. Immigration and Customs enforcement: FY07 accomplishments. n.d., www
.ice.gov/doclib/pi/news/factsheets/fy07accmplshmntsweb.pdf . , April 15, 2008. See also Krell , E. ( 2007 , Dec.). Unmasking illegal workers. HRMagazine , pp. 49–52 . 26. Wells , S. J. Counting on workers with disabilities. ( 2008 , Apr.). HRMagazine,
pp. 44–49 .
27. Four years after the ADA. ( 1996 , Nov–Dec.). Working Age , p. 2 .
28. Disability discrimination. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/types/ada.html , April 15, 2008.
29. Drug and alcohol testing: 1996 overview for employers. Bulletin. Denver: Mountain
States Employers Council Inc. , pp. 1 , 3 .
30. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law No. 101–336 , 104 Stat. 328
( 1990 ). Codified at 42 U.S.C., Section 12101 et seq.
31. Sutton v. United Airlines , 119 S. Ct. 2139 ( 1999 ); Murphy v. United Parcel Service,
119 S. Ct. 2133 ( 1999 ); Albertsons v. Kirkingsburg , 11 S. Ct. 2162 ( 1999 ).
32. Bland , T. S. , & Petesch , P. J. ( 1999 , Dec.). A battle of wills. HRMagazine , pp. 146–152 .
33. Disability discrimination. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/types/ada.html , April 15, 2008. See
also When workers just can’t cope. ( 2000 , Oct. 30). BusinessWeek , pp. 100 , 102 .
34. Willman , S. K. ( 2003 , Jan.–Feb.). Tips for minimizing abuses of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Legal Report , pp. 3–8 . Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management . See also Janove , J. W. ( 2003 , Mar.). Skating through the minefield. HRMagazine , pp. 107–113 .
35. Mook , J. ( 2007 , Jan.). Accommodation paradigm shifts. HRMagazine, pp. 115–120 .
See also Campbell , W. J. , & Reilly , M. E. ( 2000 ). Accommodations for persons with disabilities. In J. F. Kehoe. (ed.), Managing selection in changing organizations , pp. 319–367 . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .
36. Wells , S. J. Counting on workers with disabilities. ( 2008 , Apr.). HRMagazine , pp. 44–49 .
37. The ADA: Your responsibilities as an employer. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/facts/ada17.
html , April 15, 2008.
38. Ibid.
39. Kolstad v. American Dental Association , 119 S. Ct. 2118 ( 1999 ).
40. Society for Human Resource Management. ( 2007 ). FMLA: An overview of the
2007 FMLA survey . Alexandria, VA: SHRM .
41. Davis , G. M. The Family and Medical Leave Act: 10 years later. n.d., www.shrm
.org/hrresources/lrpt_published/CMS_005127.asp , August 22, 2003.
42. Most small businesses appear prepared to cope with new family-leave rules.
( 1993 , Feb. 8). The Wall Street Journal , pp. B1 , B2 .
43. Leonard , B. ( 2008 , Jan.). Bush signs military leave FMLA expansion into law. n.d.,
www.shrm.org/hrnews_published/archives/CMS_024440.asp , April 15, 2008.
44. Society for Human Resource Management. ( 2007 ). FMLA: An overview of the
2007 FMLA survey. Alexandria, VA: SHRM
45. Gamlem , C. ( 2007 , Oct.). Affirmative action plans for federal contractors. n.d.
www.shrm.org , April 16, 2008. See also Jackson , D. J. ( 1978 ). Update on handi- capped discrimination. Personnel Journal , 57 , 488–491 .
46. Thelen , J. ( 2006 , Mar.–Apr.). Workplace rights for service members: The USERRA
regulations deconstructed. Legal Report , pp. 1–8 . See also Segal , J. A. ( 2006 , Apr.).
They go and come . . . and go. HRMagazine , pp. 127–133 .
47. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994,
Public Law 102–353 ; H. R. 995.
48. EEOC Fiscal Year 2007 Performance and Accountability Report. n.d., www.eeoc
.gov/abouteeoc/plan/par/2007/index.html , April 16, 2008.
49. Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (No. 05–1074 ) 421 F. 3 d 1169 ( 2007 ). See
also Biskupic , J. ( 2007 , May 30). Time limit put on pay-bias lawsuits. USA Today , pp. 1 A, 2 A.
50. EEOC litigation statistics, FY1997 through FY2007. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/stats/
litigation.html , April 16, 2008.
51. For more information, see www.eeoc.gov/policy/guidance.html .
52. Albemarle Paper Company v. Moody ( 1975 ). 442 U.S. 407.
53. EEOC FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/
abouteeoc/plan/par/2007/performance_results.html#measure2 , April 16, 2008.
54. U.S. Department of Labor. ( 2002 ). n.d., www.dol.gov/esa/ofccp/ofwedo.htm ,
August 3, 2004.
55. OFCCP once again produces record financial remedies for a record number of
American workers in FY 07. n.d., www.dol.gov/esa/ofccp/enforc07.pdf , April 16, 2008. See also Crosby , F. J. , Iyer , A. , Clayton , S. , & Downing , R. A. ( 2003 ). Affirma- tive action: Psychological data and the policy debates. American Psychologist, 58 (2), 93–115 .
56. Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education ( 1986 ). 106 S. Ct. 1842; Local 28 Sheet Metal
Workers v. E. E. O. C. ( 1986 ). 106 S. Ct. 3019; Local 93 Firefighters v. Cleveland ( 1986 ). 106 S. Ct. 3063.
57. Johnson v. Santa Clara Transportation Agency ( 1987 , Mar. 26). 107 S. Ct. 1442, 43
FEP Cases 411; Daily Labor Report , pp. A1 , D1–D19 .
58. Crosby , F. J. , Stockdale , M. S. , & Ropp , S. A. (Eds.). ( 2007 ). Sex discrimination in the workplace. Malden, MA: Blackwell . Gutek , B. A. , & Stockdale , M. S. ( 2005 ).
Sex discrimination in employment. In F. J. Landy. (Ed.), Employment discrimination litigation (pp. 229–255 ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass . Copus , D. ( 2005 ). A lawyer’s view: Avoiding junk science. In F. J. Landy. (Ed.), Employment discrimination litigation (pp. 450–462 ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass . Parloff , R. ( 2007 , Oct. 15). The war over unconscious bias. Fortune , pp. 90–102 . Segal , J. A. ( 2007 , Aug.). Woman in the moon. HRMagazine , pp. 107–114 .
59. Guidelines on discrimination because of sex , 29CFR1604.10. Employment policies
relating to pregnancy and childbirth. (revised July 1, 2003 ).
60. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/types/pregnancy.html , April 16, 2008.
61. Ibid.
62. Arthur , M. M. ( 2003 ). Share price reactions to work-family initiatives: An institu-
tional perspective. Academy of Management Journal , 46 , 497–505 .
63. What to expect when you’re expecting. (2008, May 26). BusinessWeek , p. 17 .
64. UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc. 499 U.S. 187 ( 1991 ).
65. Kilborn , P. ( 1990 , Sept. 2). Manufacturer’s policy, women’s job rights clash. Denver
Post , p. 2 A.
66. Wermiel , S. ( 1991 , Mar. 21). Justices bar “fetal protection” policies. The Wall Street Journal , pp. B1 , B8 . See also Epstein , A. ( 1991 , Mar. 21). Ruling called women’s rights victory. Denver Post , pp. 1 A, 16 A.
67. Fetal protection policy voided. ( 1991 , May). Bulletin. Denver: Mountain States
Employers Council , p. 2
68. Fisher , A. B. ( 1993 , Aug. 23). Sexual harassment: What to do. Fortune , pp. 84–88 .
69. n.d., www.eeoc.gov/types/sexual_harassment.html , April 16, 2008.
70. Woo , J. ( 1992 , Nov. 23). Secret taping of supervisors is on the rise, lawyers say. The Wall Street Journal , pp. B1 , B5 .
71. Kesselman , D. , & Williams , T. S. ( 2007 , July). Speak, you’re on candid recorder.
HRMagazine , pp. 105–109 .
72. EEOC. ( 2003 ). Guidelines on discrimination because of sex. 29CFR, 1604.11 Sexual
harassment (Revised from earlier edition on July 1, 2003 ).
73. Barnes v. Costle ( 1977 ). 561 F. 2d 983 (D. C. Cir.).
74. 118 S. Ct. 2257 ( 1998 ).
75. 118 S. Ct. 2275 ( 1998 ).
76. Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson ( 1986 ). 477 U.S. 57.
77. Ibid.
78. Morrell , A. J. ( 2000 , Jan.–Feb.). Nonemployee harassment. Legal Report , pp. 1–4 . Washington, DC: Society for Human Resource Management .
79. 93 Fair Employment Practices Cases (BNA) 1473 ( 2004 ).
80. Jacobs , A. N. ( 2004 , July 27). An instant message from the Supreme Court: Are you
listening? Employment Source Newsletter , n.d., www.epexperts.com .
81. Lublin , J. S. ( 2006 , May 15). Harassment law in U.S. is strict, foreigners find. The Wall Street Journal , pp. B1 , B3 . See also, Orey , M. ( 2006 , May 22). Trouble at Toyota. BusinessWeek , pp. 46–48 .
82. Ibid. See also Segal , J. A. ( 1999 , Nov.). Strategic planning for Troglodyte-free workplaces. HRMagazine , pp. 138–148 . See also LaGow , R. ( 1998 , Aug.). High court expands, clarifies employer liability for sex harassment. HR News , p. 6 .
83. For an example of an actual policy, see www.shrm.org/hrtools/policies_published/
CMS_000555.asp .
84. Schwager v. Sun Oil Company of PA ( 1979 ). 591 F. 2d 58 (10th Cir.).
85. Lauricella , T. ( 2007 , Sept. 16). How old are you? As old as your skills. The Wall Street Journal Sunday , p. 2. See also Coy , P. ( 2005 , June 27). Old. Smart.
Productive. BusinessWeek , pp. 78–86 .
86. Sterns , H. L. , Doverspike , D. , & Lax , G. A. ( 2005 ). The Age Discrimination in Employment Act. In F. J. Landy. (Ed.), Employment discrimination litigation
(pp. 256–293 ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass . See also Bravin , J. ( 2005 , Mar. 31).
Court expands age-bias claims for work force. The Wall Street Journal , pp.
B1 ; B3 .
87. Grossman , R. J. ( 2003 , Aug.). Are you ignoring older workers? HRMagazine , pp. 40–46 .
88. Jordan , M. ( 2005 , Nov. 8). Testing “English-only” rules. The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1; B13. Clark , M. M. ( 2002 , Oct.). Listen up! Language diversity has ups and downs. HR News , p. 17. Roffer , M. H. , & Sanservino , Jr. , N. J. ( 2000 , Sept.). Holding employees’ native tongues. HRMagazine , pp. 177–184 .
89. Holland, K. (2008, Jan. 27). When English is the rule at work. The New York Times.
www.nytimes.com, Aug. 24, 2008. Prengaman , P. ( 2003 , Aug, 21). Language barrier a peril on fire lines. The Denver Post , p. 16 A.
90. Age discrimination—Overqualified. ( 1993 , July). Bulletin. Denver: Mountain States
Employers Council, Inc. , p. 2 .
91. Wells , S. J. (Oct. 2004 ). Too good to hire? HRMagazine. n.d., www.shrm.org/
hrmagazine/articles/1004/1004covstory.asp , April 16, 2008.
92. California Brewers Association v. Bryant ( 1982 ). 444 U.S. 598, p. 605 .
93. See, for example, Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. ( 1976 ). 424 U.S. 747;
International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States ( 1977 ). 432 U.S. 324;
American Tobacco Company v. Patterson ( 1982 ). 535 F. 2d 257 (CA-4). See also Gordon , M. E. , & Johnson , W. A. ( 1982 ). Seniority: A review of its legal and scien- tific standing . Personnel Psychology , 35 , 255–280 .
94. Firefighters Local Union No. 1784 v. Stotts ( 1984 ). 104 S. Ct. 2576.
95. Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education ( 1986 ). 106 S. Ct. 1842.
96. Greenhouse , L. ( 1984 , June 13). Seniority is held to outweigh race as a layoff guide.
The New York Times , pp. A1 , B12 .
97. Britt , L. P. , III ( 1984 ). Affirmative action: Is there life after Stotts? Personnel Admin- istrator, 29 (9), 96–100 .
98. US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett ( 00–1250 ) 535 U.S. 391 ( 2002 ) 228 F. 3d 1105.
99. Barrier , M. ( 2002 , July). A line in the sand. n.d., www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/
articles/0702/0702barrier.asp , April 17, 2008.
100. Griggs v. Duke Power Company ( 1971 ). 402 U.S. 424.
101. Ibid., p. 428 .
102. Society for Industrial and Organization Psychology, Inc. ( 2003 ). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (4th ed.). Bowling Green, OH: Author . See also Committee on Psychological Tests and Assessment, American Psychological Association. ( 1996 . June). Statement on the disclosure of test data. American Psychologist . 51, 644–648 .
103. Justices uphold utility’s stand on job testing. ( 1979 , Mar. 6). The Wall Street Journal , p. 4 .
104. Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust ( 1988 ). 108 S. Ct. 299.
105. McPhail , S. M. (Ed.). ( 2007 ). Alternative validation strategies. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass . See also Bersoff , D. N. ( 1988 ). Should subjective employment devices be scrutinized? American Psychologist , 43 , 1016–1018 .
106. EEOC v. Radiator Specialty Company ( 1979 ). 610 F. 2d 178 (4th Cir.).
107. Dothard v. Rawlinson ( 1977 ). 433 U.S. 321.
108. Gregory v. Litton Systems Inc. ( 1973 ). 472 F. 2d 631 (9th Cir.).
109. Webster v. Redmond ( 1979 ). 599 F. 2d 793 (7th Cir.).
110. Hyland v. Fukada ( 1978 ). 580 F. 2d 977 (9th Cir.).
111. Erlam , N. A. ( 2005 ). Walking the criminal records tightrope. n.d., www.shrm.org/
ema/sm/articles/2005/octdec05Erlam.asp , April 17, 2008.
112. McDonald v. Santa Fe Transportation Co. ( 1976 ). 427 U.S. 273.
113. Von Drehle, D. ( 2003 , June 24). Court mirrors public opinion . The Washington Post. n.d., www.washingtonpost.com .