list in directory join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More

Total Articles: 5

3d Cir.: Disparate Impact of Newark, NJ’s Residency Requirement

In Meditz v. City of Newark (PDF), the Third Circuit concluded that the City of Newark, New Jersey’s residency requirement may have unlawful disparate impact on non-Hispanic white applicants. The case was brought Gregory Meditz, an attorney acting pro se. Meditz alleged that the City’s residency requirement disparately impacted white, non-Hispanics and, as a result, white, non-Hispanics were under-represented in the City’s workforce.

EMPLOYMENT TESTING AND UNINTENTIONAL DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS.

For the second time in a year, the United States Supreme Court has ruled on whether civil service tests given to firefighters are discriminatory. Although the two opinions arise in the contexts of big city fire departments, they are significant for all employers who rely on standardized testing in the hiring process.

A HOBSON’S CHOICE: HIGH COURT SHARPLY LIMITS EMPLOYERS’ OPTIONS FOR AVOIDING BIAS CLAIMS.

When a group of White firefighters came out on top in a promotional exam, a Connecticut Fire Department became worried about possible racial bias in the exam.

'RICCI' AND A HARD PLACE.

When is it lawful under anti-discrimination laws for an employer to intentionally discriminate against members of one protected class, to avoid a disparate impact claim by individuals in another protected group? The U.S. Supreme Court addressed that question in Ricci v. DeStefano, 2009 DJDAR 9567 (June 29, 2009). The court's decision explains the interplay between two branches of anti-discrimination laws: disparate treatment and disparate impact.

US Supreme Court Rules For White Firefighters In Race Bias Case.

Is there such a thing as “reverse” race discrimination in the workplace? Yes. “Reverse discrimination” is not term found statutory prohibitions against job discrimination, but it is commonly understood to mean giving preference to minority employees at the expense of Caucasian employees. With few exceptions, discriminating against white employees is no less illegal than discriminating against minority employees.
    SORT ARTICLES
  • No Subtopics.
Lawyer Login: Workipedia • EL Match

Auto-login Show name as online

Forgot your password?I Want To Participate!