What Were the Legal Issues in This Case?

What were the legal issues in this case?

In my opinion, the legal issue I conclude in regard to this case is David Dunlap was discriminated against with disparate treatment and disparate impact Looking for a clear definition of disparate treatment and disparate impact really means, I found the answer with the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 VII. This act limits employers from handling employees or potential applicants inconsistently and differently because they fall within a category of a protected class. The issue in this matter concerns itself with whether the employer was moved by disparate treatment or any underlying discrimination that may which may be shown through direct or indirect behavior.

There were many actions by TVA that were questionable. Although Dunlap had better performance in attendance, longevity, experience and safety records, somehow he received lower scores than his white counterparts. It also seems like after many attempts to obtain permanent employment with the company, he was consistently overlooked and disregarded. Ironically, Dunlap had other Black peers that experienced the same exact problems at TVA regarding discrimination.

Now, if discrimination is not involved, then we also look at disparate impact where Title VII makes the employer refrain from using an unfair employment behavior that causes and negative impact on people who fall into a certain protected class. So in this case, Dunlap was required to prove that the company treated one group more harshly than another group.

Explain why the plaintiff's disparate (adverse) impact claim failed?

Under the disparate impact consideration, Dunlap didn't have to prove discrimination, however, had to show how the TVA manipulated their interview procedure with racial discrimination against Black workers. Dunlap was not able to produce enough evidence that TVA's interviewing practices were consistently used in all their hiring procedures. Dunlap didn't have statistical evidence to back his claim with disparate impact that any other protected class was negatively affected.

Unfortunately, the court of Appeals did not accept his claims in this area indicating his own interview by itself. Now, the district court found that Dunlap had been a victim of discrimination considering both disparate treatment and disparate impact theories and concluded TVA supported racial prejudice against Dunlap as well as other black counterparts. However, "The Appeals Court affirmed the disparate treatment claim, reversed the disparate impact claim, and affirmed the district court's award of damages and fees to Mr. Dunlap" (Walsh, 2010).

Explain why the plaintiff's disparate treatment claim succeeded?

"A plaintiff may establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing (1) that he is a member of a protected group, (2) that he was qualified the position at issue, and (3) that he was treated differently than comparable employees outside of the protected class" (Caselaw). To be specific, TVA set themselves