employment law

Discrimination Scenario Analysis
Part 1
IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS pieces of evidence (facts) that supports the claimants’ allegations:
To support their allegations, the 32 former employees of ABC Delivery Company will have to prove that they were indeed treated in a discriminatory manner in comparison to their counterparts, on the basis of race. They would have to present a prima facie case. In this particular case, we do not have direct evidence of discrimination. With this in mind, the employees would have to rely on circumstantial evidence to the effect that the ten-year seniority mark was deliberately used as a cut-off for the VSP package with an intention of locking out black employees who had been hired ‘en masse’ only 9 years earlier after the company settled a claim whereby it had been accused of discrimination.
Next, they would be required to prove pretext after the response from the company indicating that it did not act in a discriminatory or illegitimate manner. In this case, the aim would be to demonstrate that the reason stated by the company is false. The company in this case is likely to give the reason that it acted following the restructuring decision from Speedy International. In this case, the employees could demonstrate that there was a clear significant difference between the number of black employees who were advanced the VSP package versus those who were not. Only 20% of black employees received VSP.
Part 2
IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS facts that support the employer’s defense:
In its defense, the company would in this case state a reason(s) for the decision undertaken. Towards this end, the reason ought to be not only nondiscriminatory, but also legitimate so as to effectively counter the employees’ prima facie case. It is important to note that as per a decision of the Supreme Court, the burden of proving discrimination largely rests on the 32 former employees. In that regard, therefore, all that ABC Delivery Company has to do is present evidence to the effect that its decision was not only nondiscriminatory, but also legitimate. The company could, therefore, state that it acted following the restructuring decision from Speedy International. The closure of domestic air and ground services by Speedy International meant that ABC Company was left with a bloated workforce, and to remain relevant in an increasingly competitive marketplace, it had to make its workforce leaner. The company could further claim that the 10-year mark as the cutoff for the VSP program was essentially a reward for those who had been with the company for a long period of time.