Articles Discussing Race Discrimination Under Title VII Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964.

Following recent events, employers may experience an increase in the number of race discrimination complaints in the workplace. Many organisations in the United Kingdom, in the United States, and globally have made public statements to reinforce their commitment to racial equality.

Several prominent companies across the nation recently announced that they would observe Juneteenth as a holiday. This new trend of observing Juneteenth comes in the wake of several weeks of protests across the world advocating for an end to racial injustice and police brutality. These protests have generated discourse across

On October 1, a federal trial court in Massachusetts upheld Harvard University’s use of race in its admissions process against a challenge that the policy discriminates against Asian-American students on the basis of race. The decision followed a long line of U.S. Supreme Court cases holding that colleges and universities may use race as a “plus factor” among many in admissions decisions.

On March 19, 2019, Facebook settled several lawsuits brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Communications Workers of America, and various housing groups related to the placement of employment advertisements on Facebook’s website aimed at selected users based on their age or gender.

Cindy-Ann Thomas and her guests Littler Shareholder Allan King, and author and historian Carroll “C.R.” Gibbs provide a multi-faceted examination of the label “People of Color.” In this podcast, Cindy-Ann, Allan, and C.R. address the following, head-on:

One strike, you’re out?

A municipal employer that conducted hair follicle drug testing on police officers was not entitled to summary judgment on a Title VII disparate impact claim, because a reasonable jury could conclude that an alternative to hair follicle drug testing would have met the employer’s legitimate needs, according to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Recent publicity surrounding a casting call for the Broadway musical “Hamilton” should remind employers of the danger of using discriminatory criteria in job ads.

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015, the Second Circuit upheld Judge Margo K. Brodie’s grant of summary judgment to Owens and Minor Distribution, Inc. (O&M) in a race and national origin discrimination and retaliation case. The Second Circuit agreed with the Eastern District of New York’s decision that O&M, a distributor of medical and surgical supplies, presented a legitimate non-discriminatory and non-retaliatory reason for terminating Mr. Joseph. In its well-reasoned decision, the district court provided a helpful reminder in guiding employers through the employment cycle of an employee with performance difficulties.

Despite the heightened scrutiny given to reverse racial discrimination claims, it is difficult but not impossible to prevail under the right circumstances.