Disparate Impact

Disparate Impact resides in many kinds of instances where cases of discrimination can be found. It can reside in the field of employment, health, and education (Bornholz & Heckman, 2004). In general, disparate impact is an inconsistency that violates the basic rights of an individual. This includes racial discrimination, unequal business/medical/education practices, age discrimination, and others. USCCR online defines "disparate impact" as follows.

The adverse effect of a facially neutral practice that nonetheless discriminates against persons because of their race, sex, national origin, age, or disability and that has not been shown to be job related and consistent with business necessity. Discriminatory intent is irrelevant in a disparate-impact claim. The importance of giving attention to what disparate impact is, as well as its causes and effects, is to protect every citizen with their basic civil rights.

Allowing the review and analysis of events where there is a claim and theory for disparate impact permits a room for justice and promotes equality to every individual. Disparate impact challenges the judicial system's responsibility to protect the people from any harm, bias treatments, and unfair events. For instance, in a case where an employer only selects applicants with no arrest records can be considered discriminatory to minorities because most of them are often times arrested by Caucasians due to racial discrimination.

David Wright Tremaine explains the importance of disparate impact in such case saying that, Disparate impact involves a challenge to an employment policy that may be neutral or nondiscriminatory on its face but has a disproportionate or disparate impact on a protected class. Here the focus is on the consequences of employment practices, rather than on the employer's motives. Ruling and Reasoning of Court Because disparate impact involves different types of cases involving a claim for justice, we can find different ruling and reasoning of court.

All of which depends on the events and situations where an issue of disparate impact is being claimed. One instance where a disparate impact claim can be approved in court is in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The court rules that workers who are over age 40 can claim for a disparate impact without having to provide intentional discrimination evidences but by showing that their employer's company policy has unfair effects on them (DLA Piper Rudnick Online, 2005).

However, according to DLA Piper Rudnick Online (2005), the court also rules a defeat for the disparate impact claim if there are reasonable factors from the defendant's employment policy and procedures that caused an unintentional discrimination. " ..

The Court held that such a claim may be defeated if the employer's policy, practice, or procedure is based on factors, such as seniority or position, that may be rationally related to a legitimate objective." One example of which where an employer may win against a disparate impact claim concerning age bias during hiring is if the job position requires involvement of physical factors such as strength and capability of the employees to fulfill a physical-related jobs (i.e. construction workers).

Another case of disparate impact is during an apparent racial discrimination during an employment hiring, or any aspect of employment. The court rules that there is a legitimate disparate impact claim if the racial background of an employee does not have any effect or relationship to the job (Larson, A., 2003). There are many situations that the court balances the rationale between a claim for disparate impact and the reasons of the defendant against the claim.

In general, the court's reasoning and how they rule on which side has a legitimate claim concerning an issue of disparate impact are based on what is rational within the situations that are involved in the case submitted for trial. Basically, a plaintiff wins if adverse effects from unreasonable grounds are proven. On the other hand, a defendant can similarly win if the motives of his act, policies, or procedures, though may have caused unintentional discrimination, have reasonable basis why the act, policies, or procedures, are required.

Implications of the Ruling for Employment Environment The implications of the rulings on disparate impact, in general, can be seen as a protective measure to the civil rights of every individual. Though broad in nature during the balancing process of the motives and grounds in every case, the objective of ruling in disparate impact issues is to promote equality. This is.