teamsters
argued
january
decided
may
together
et
also
certiorari
instituted
litigation
title
vii
civil
rights
act
petitioners
nationwide
common
carrier
motor
freight
union
representing
large
group
company
employees
government
alleged
company
engaged
pattern
practice
discriminating
negroes
persons
hereinafter
sometimes
collectively
minority
members
hired
servicemen
local
city
drivers
lower
paying
less
desirable
jobs
positions
line
drivers
drivers
went
whites
seniority
system
agreements
petitioners
perpetuated
locked
effects
past
racial
ethnic
discrimination
system
city
driver
serviceman
transferred
job
forfeit
competitive
seniority
accumulated
previous
bargaining
unit
start
bottom
line
drivers
board
government
sought
general
injunctive
remedy
specific
make
whole
relief
individual
discriminatees
allow
opportunity
transfer
jobs
full
company
seniority
section
title
vii
makes
unlawful
employment
practice
inter
alia
employer
fail
refuse
hire
individual
otherwise
discriminate
regard
employment
race
national
origin
section
provides
part
notwithstanding
provisions
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
apply
different
employment
standards
pursuant
bona
fide
seniority
system
provided
differences
result
intention
discriminate
district
trial
respect
employment
discrimination
seniority
system
agreements
held
petitioners
violated
title
vii
enjoined
company
union
committing
violations
thereof
respect
individual
relief
determined
affected
class
discriminatees
included
minority
members
hired
city
drivers
servicemen
every
company
terminal
operation
whether
hired
title
vii
effective
date
discriminatees
thereby
became
entitled
preference
applicants
future
finding
members
affected
class
injured
varying
degrees
created
three
subclasses
applied
different
formula
filling
jobs
establishment
seniority
giving
retroactive
seniority
effective
date
act
suffered
severe
injury
right
class
member
vacancy
made
subject
prior
recall
rights
agreement
line
drivers
layoff
three
years
although
agreeing
district
basic
conclusions
appeals
rejected
trisection
holding
minority
members
bid
future
jobs
basis
company
seniority
class
member
became
line
driver
use
full
company
seniority
even
antedated
title
vii
effective
date
limited
qualification
date
formula
seniority
awarded
periods
prior
date
job
vacant
class
member
met
given
opportunity
met
qualifications
holding
priority
favor
workers
unduly
impede
eradication
past
discrimination
appeals
directed
purely
temporary
vacancy
arose
class
member
might
compete
line
driver
layoff
basis
member
retroactive
seniority
held
government
sustained
burden
proving
company
engaged
systemwide
pattern
practice
employment
discrimination
minority
members
violation
title
vii
regularly
purposefully
treating
members
less
favorably
white
persons
evidence
showing
pervasive
statistical
disparities
positions
employment
minority
members
whites
bolstered
considerable
testimony
specific
instances
discrimination
adequately
rebutted
company
supported
findings
courts
pp
since
government
proved
company
engaged
pattern
discriminatory
employment
policies
retroactive
seniority
may
awarded
relief
discriminatees
even
seniority
system
agreement
makes
provision
relief
franks
bowman
transportation
pp
seniority
system
protected
therefore
union
conduct
agreeing
maintaining
system
violate
title
vii
employees
suffered
discrimination
entitled
relief
person
may
given
retroactive
seniority
date
earlier
act
effective
date
district
injunction
union
must
consequently
vacated
pp
virtue
bona
fide
seniority
system
become
unlawful
simply
may
perpetuate
vii
discrimination
congress
manifest
language
legislative
history
act
intend
make
illegal
employees
vested
seniority
rights
continue
exercise
rights
even
expense
discriminatees
thus
company
intentional
discrimination
disproportionate
advantage
given
seniority
system
white
line
drivers
longest
tenure
minority
member
employees
might
enjoyed
advantages
discrimination
sanctioned
pp
seniority
system
issue
entirely
bona
fide
applying
races
ethnic
groups
negotiated
maintained
free
discriminatory
purpose
pp
every
minority
member
applicant
position
presumptively
entitled
relief
subject
showing
company
earlier
refusal
place
applicant
job
based
policy
discrimination
cf
franks
supra
pp
incumbent
employee
failure
apply
job
inexorably
bar
award
retroactive
seniority
individual
nonapplicants
must
afforded
opportunity
undertake
difficult
task
proving
treated
applicants
therefore
presumptively
entitled
relief
accordingly
pp
congress
purpose
vesting
broad
equitable
powers
title
vii
courts
make
possible
fashion
ing
complete
relief
possible
albemarle
paper
moody
measured
broad
prophylactic
purposes
title
vii
company
assertion
person
actually
applied
job
never
awarded
seniority
relief
prevail
consistently
enforced
discriminatory
policy
surely
deter
job
applications
aware
unwilling
subject
humiliation
explicit
certain
rejection
pp
however
nonapplicant
must
still
show
potential
victim
unlawful
discrimination
applied
job
company
discriminatory
practices
known
prospect
discriminatory
rejection
shows
employees
wanted
jobs
may
deterred
applying
show
nonapplicants
actually
wanted
jobs
qualified
consequently
government
burden
proving
remedial
hearing
conducted
district
specific
nonapplicants
applied
jobs
knowledge
company
discriminatory
policies
pp
hearing
remand
district
identify
minority
members
actual
victims
discrimination
application
basic
principles
equity
balance
interest
legitimate
expectations
employees
innocent
wrongdoing
pp
stewart
delivered
opinion
burger
white
blackmun
powell
rehnquist
stevens
joined
marshall
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
brennan
joined
post
wells
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
david
previant
william
baab
robert
shuler
argued
cause
petitioner
brief
john
ester
deputy
solicitor
general
wallace
argued
cause
et
al
cases
brief
solicitor
general
bork
assistant
attorney
general
pottinger
thomas
martin
brian
landsberg
david
rose
william
fenton
jessica
dunsay
silver
abner
fn
jack
greenberg
peter
sherwood
barry
goldstein
eric
schnapper
filed
brief
naacp
legal
defense
educational
fund
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
briefs
amici
curiae
filed
michael
warner
robert
williams
douglas
mcdowell
equal
employment
advisory
council
walton
garrett
road
drivers
justice
stewart
delivered
opinion
litigation
brings
several
important
questions
title
vii
civil
rights
act
stat
amended
et
seq
ed
supp
issues
grow
alleged
unlawful
employment
practices
engaged
employer
union
employer
common
carrier
motor
freight
nationwide
operations
union
represents
large
group
employees
district
appeals
held
employer
violated
title
vii
engaging
pattern
practice
employment
discrimination
negroes
americans
union
violated
act
agreeing
employer
create
maintain
seniority
system
perpetuated
effects
past
racial
ethnic
discrimination
addition
basic
questions
presented
two
rulings
subsidiary
issues
must
resolved
violations
title
vii
occurred
issues
concerning
nature
relief
aggrieved
individuals
may
entitled
brought
action
tennessee
federal
petitioner
company
pursuant
civil
rights
act
complaint
charged
company
followed
discriminatory
hiring
assignment
promotion
policies
negroes
terminal
nashville
government
brought
second
action
company
almost
three
years
later
federal
district
texas
charging
pattern
practice
employment
discrimination
negroes
persons
throughout
company
transportation
system
petitioner
international
brotherhood
teamsters
union
joined
defendant
suit
two
actions
consolidated
trial
northern
district
texas
central
claim
lawsuits
company
engaged
pattern
practice
discriminating
minorities
hiring
line
drivers
negroes
persons
hired
government
alleged
given
lower
paying
less
desirable
jobs
servicemen
local
city
drivers
thereafter
discriminated
respect
promotions
transfers
connection
complaint
also
challenged
seniority
system
established
agreements
employer
union
government
sought
general
injunctive
remedy
specific
make
whole
relief
individual
discriminatees
allow
opportunity
transfer
jobs
full
company
seniority
purposes
cases
went
trial
district
found
government
shown
preponderance
evidence
predecessor
companies
engaged
plan
practice
discrimination
violation
title
vii
found
seniority
system
contained
contracts
company
union
violated
title
vii
operate
impede
free
transfer
minority
groups
within
company
company
union
enjoined
committing
violations
title
vii
respect
individual
relief
accepted
government
basic
contention
affected
class
discriminatees
included
negro
incumbent
employees
hired
fill
city
operations
serviceman
jobs
every
terminal
operation
employees
whether
hired
effective
date
title
vii
thereby
became
entitled
preference
applicants
respect
consideration
future
vacancies
jobs
finding
members
affected
class
injured
different
degrees
created
three
subclasses
thirty
persons
produced
convincing
evidence
discrimination
harm
found
suffered
severe
injury
ordered
offered
opportunity
fill
jobs
competitive
seniority
dating
back
july
effective
date
title
vii
second
subclass
included
four
persons
possibly
objects
discrimination
likely
harmed
specific
evidence
discrimination
injury
decreed
persons
entitled
fill
vacancies
jobs
competitive
seniority
january
date
government
filed
systemwide
lawsuit
finally
remaining
members
affected
class
evidence
show
individuals
either
harmed
harmed
individually
ordered
considered
jobs
ahead
applicants
general
public
behind
two
subclasses
third
subclass
received
retroactive
seniority
competitive
seniority
line
drivers
begin
date
hired
line
drivers
decreed
right
class
member
fill
vacancy
subject
prior
recall
rights
line
drivers
agreements
effect
extended
three
years
appeals
fifth
circuit
agreed
basic
conclusions
district
company
engaged
pattern
practice
employment
discrimination
seniority
system
agreements
violated
title
vii
applied
victims
prior
discrimination
appellate
held
however
relief
ordered
district
inadequate
rejecting
district
attempt
trisect
affected
class
appeals
held
negro
incumbent
employees
entitled
bid
future
jobs
basis
company
seniority
class
member
filled
job
use
full
company
seniority
even
predated
effective
date
title
vii
purposes
including
bidding
layoff
award
retroactive
seniority
limited
qualification
date
formula
seniority
awarded
periods
prior
date
position
vacant
class
member
met
met
given
opportunity
qualifications
employment
line
driver
finally
appeals
modified
part
district
decree
subjected
rights
class
members
fill
future
vacancies
recall
rights
employees
holding
priority
favor
workers
unduly
impede
eradication
past
discrimination
appeals
ordered
class
members
allowed
compete
vacancies
employees
basis
class
members
retroactive
seniority
line
drivers
retain
prior
recall
rights
respect
purely
temporary
vacancies
ibid
appeals
remanded
case
district
hold
evidentiary
hearings
necessary
apply
remedial
principles
granted
company
union
petitions
certiorari
consider
significant
questions
presented
civil
rights
act
ii
company
union
contend
conduct
violate
title
vii
respect
asserting
first
evidence
introduced
trial
insufficient
show
company
engaged
pattern
practice
employment
discrimination
union
contends
seniority
system
contained
agreements
way
violated
title
vii
contentions
correct
unnecessary
course
reach
issues
concerning
remedies
occupied
attention
appeals
consideration
question
whether
company
engaged
pattern
practice
discriminatory
hiring
practices
involves
controlling
legal
principles
relatively
clear
government
theory
discrimination
simply
company
violation
title
vii
regularly
purposefully
treated
negroes
americans
less
favorably
white
persons
disparity
treatment
allegedly
involved
refusal
recruit
hire
transfer
promote
minority
group
members
equal
basis
white
people
particularly
respect
positions
ultimate
factual
issues
thus
simply
whether
pattern
practice
disparate
treatment
whether
differences
racially
premised
mcdonnell
douglas
green
plaintiff
government
bore
initial
burden
making
prima
facie
case
discrimination
albemarle
paper
moody
mcdonnell
douglas
green
supra
alleged
systemwide
pattern
practice
resistance
full
enjoyment
title
vii
rights
government
ultimately
prove
mere
occurrence
isolated
accidental
sporadic
discriminatory
acts
establish
preponderance
evidence
racial
discrimination
company
standard
operating
procedure
regular
rather
unusual
practice
agree
district
appeals
government
carried
burden
proof
march
shortly
government
filed
complaint
alleging
systemwide
discrimination
company
employees
negroes
americans
line
drivers
however
negroes
persons
negroes
hired
litigation
commenced
one
exception
man
worked
line
driver
chicago
terminal
company
predecessors
employ
negro
regular
basis
line
driver
government
showed
even
terminals
areas
substantial
negro
population
company
line
drivers
white
great
majority
negroes
americans
work
company
held
lower
paying
city
operations
serviceman
jobs
whereas
nonminority
employees
held
jobs
categories
government
bolstered
statistical
evidence
testimony
individuals
recounted
specific
instances
discrimination
upon
basis
testimony
district
found
umerous
qualified
black
american
applicants
sought
line
driving
jobs
company
years
either
requests
ignored
given
false
misleading
information
requirements
opportunities
application
procedures
considered
hired
basis
whites
considered
hired
minority
employees
wanted
transfer
jobs
met
similar
difficulties
company
principal
response
evidence
statistics
never
prove
existence
pattern
practice
discrimination
even
establish
prima
facie
case
shifting
employer
burden
rebutting
inference
raised
figures
even
brief
summary
evidence
shows
case
government
relied
statistics
alone
individuals
testified
personal
experiences
company
brought
cold
numbers
convincingly
life
event
cases
make
unmistakably
clear
tatistical
analyses
served
continue
serve
important
role
cases
existence
discrimination
disputed
issue
mayor
philadelphia
educational
equality
league
see
also
mcdonnell
douglas
green
cf
washington
davis
repeatedly
approved
use
statistical
proof
reached
proportions
comparable
case
establish
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
jury
selection
cases
see
turner
fouche
hernandez
texas
norris
alabama
statistics
equally
competent
proving
employment
discrimination
caution
statistics
irrefutable
come
infinite
variety
like
kind
evidence
may
rebutted
short
usefulness
depends
surrounding
facts
circumstances
see
hester
southern
addition
general
protest
use
statistics
title
vii
cases
company
claims
case
statistics
revealing
racial
imbalance
misleading
fail
take
account
company
particular
business
situation
effective
date
title
vii
company
concedes
line
drivers
virtually
white
july
claims
thereafter
business
conditions
work
force
dropped
argument
low
personnel
turnover
rather
discrimination
accounts
recent
statistical
disparities
points
substantial
minority
hiring
later
years
especially
showing
patterns
discrimination
broken
argument
forceful
one
employer
time
suit
done
virtually
new
hiring
since
effective
date
title
vii
although
company
total
number
employees
apparently
dropped
somewhat
late
record
shows
many
line
drivers
continued
hired
throughout
period
almost
white
sure
improvements
company
hiring
practices
appeals
commented
recent
minority
hiring
progress
stands
laudable
good
faith
effort
eradicate
effects
past
discrimination
area
hiring
initial
assignment
district
appeals
found
upon
substantial
evidence
company
engaged
course
discrimination
continued
well
effective
date
title
vii
company
later
changes
hiring
promotion
policies
little
comfort
victims
earlier
discrimination
erase
previous
illegal
conduct
obligation
afford
relief
suffered
cf
albemarle
paper
moody
district
appeals
basis
substantial
evidence
held
government
proved
prima
facie
case
systematic
purposeful
employment
discrimination
continuing
well
beyond
effective
date
title
vii
company
attempts
rebut
conclusion
held
inadequate
reasons
summarized
warrant
disturb
findings
district
appeals
basic
issue
see
blau
lehman
faulkner
gibbs
dickinson
commercial
credit
chemical
foundation
baker
schofield
towson
moore
district
appeals
also
found
seniority
system
contained
agreements
company
union
operated
violate
title
vii
act
purposes
calculating
benefits
vacations
pensions
fringe
benefits
employee
seniority
system
runs
date
joins
company
takes
account
total
service
jobs
bargaining
units
competitive
purposes
however
determining
order
employees
may
bid
particular
jobs
laid
recalled
layoff
seniority
controls
thus
line
driver
seniority
purposes
bidding
particular
runs
protection
layoff
takes
account
length
time
line
driver
particular
terminal
practical
effect
city
driver
serviceman
transfers
job
must
forfeit
competitive
seniority
accumulated
previous
bargaining
unit
start
bottom
line
drivers
board
vice
arrangement
found
district
appeals
locked
minority
workers
inferior
jobs
perpetuated
prior
discrimination
discouraging
transfers
jobs
line
drivers
disincentive
applied
workers
including
whites
negroes
persons
courts
found
suffered
many
denied
equal
opportunity
become
line
drivers
initially
hired
whereas
whites
either
sought
refused
positions
reasons
unrelated
race
national
origin
linchpin
theory
embraced
district
appeals
discriminatee
must
forfeit
competitive
seniority
order
finally
obtain
job
never
able
catch
seniority
level
contemporary
subject
discrimination
accordingly
continued
disadvantage
prior
discriminatee
transfers
job
held
constitute
continuing
violation
title
vii
employer
union
jointly
created
maintain
seniority
system
liable
union
acknowledging
seniority
system
may
sense
perpetuate
effects
prior
discrimination
asserts
system
immunized
finding
illegality
reason
title
vii
provides
part
notwithstanding
provision
subchapter
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
apply
different
standards
compensation
different
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
pursuant
bona
fide
seniority
system
provided
differences
result
intention
discriminate
race
national
origin
government
responds
seniority
system
perpetuates
effects
prior
discrimination
never
bona
fide
minimum
title
vii
prohibits
applications
seniority
system
perpetuate
effects
incumbent
employees
prior
discriminatory
job
assignments
issues
thus
joined
open
ones
considered
franks
bowman
transportation
decided
bar
award
retroactive
seniority
job
applicants
seek
relief
employer
hiring
discrimination
stated
thrust
directed
toward
defining
illegal
discriminatory
practice
instances
operation
seniority
system
challenged
perpetuating
effects
discrimination
occurring
prior
effective
date
act
beyond
noting
general
purpose
statute
however
undertake
task
statutory
construction
required
litigation
company
discriminated
enactment
title
vii
seniority
system
said
operated
perpetuate
effects
discrimination
discriminatees
however
may
obtain
full
make
whole
relief
including
retroactive
seniority
franks
bowman
supra
without
attacking
legality
seniority
system
applied
franks
made
clear
union
acknowledges
retroactive
seniority
may
awarded
relief
employer
discriminatory
hiring
assignment
policies
even
seniority
system
agreement
makes
provision
relief
government
proved
company
engaged
pattern
discriminatory
hiring
assignment
transfer
promotion
policies
negro
american
injured
policies
may
receive
appropriate
relief
direct
remedy
discrimination
remains
review
judgment
seniority
system
unlawfully
perpetuated
effects
discrimination
must
decide
short
whether
validates
otherwise
bona
fide
seniority
systems
afford
constructive
seniority
victims
discriminated
prior
effective
date
title
vii
issue
turn
primary
purpose
title
vii
assure
equality
employment
opportunities
eliminate
discriminatory
practices
devices
fostered
racially
stratified
job
environments
disadvantage
minority
citizens
mcdonnell
douglas
green
see
also
albemarle
paper
moody
alexander
griggs
duke
power
achieve
purpose
congress
proscribe
overt
discrimination
also
practices
fair
form
discriminatory
operation
thus
repeatedly
held
prima
facie
title
vii
violation
may
established
policies
practices
neutral
face
intent
nonetheless
discriminate
effect
particular
group
general
electric
gilbert
washington
davis
albemarle
paper
moody
supra
mcdonnell
douglas
green
supra
griggs
duke
power
supra
one
kind
practice
fair
form
discriminatory
operation
perpetuates
effects
prior
discrimination
held
griggs
act
practices
procedures
tests
neutral
face
even
neutral
terms
intent
maintained
operate
freeze
status
quo
prior
discriminatory
employment
practices
seniority
system
case
seem
fall
griggs
rationale
heart
system
allocation
choicest
jobs
greatest
protection
layoffs
advantages
employees
line
drivers
longest
time
employer
prior
intentional
discrimination
line
drivers
longest
tenure
without
exception
white
advantages
seniority
system
flow
disproportionately
away
negro
employees
might
enjoyed
advantages
employer
discriminated
passage
act
disproportionate
distribution
advantages
real
sense
operate
freeze
status
quo
prior
discriminatory
employment
practices
literal
terms
legislative
history
title
vii
demonstrate
congress
considered
effect
many
seniority
systems
extended
measure
immunity
throughout
initial
consideration
later
enacted
civil
rights
act
critics
bill
charged
destroy
existing
seniority
rights
consistent
response
title
vii
congressional
proponents
justice
department
seniority
rights
affected
even
employer
discriminated
prior
act
interpretive
memorandum
placed
congressional
record
senators
clark
case
stated
title
vii
effect
established
seniority
rights
effect
prospective
retrospective
thus
example
business
discriminating
past
result
working
force
title
comes
effect
employer
obligation
simply
fill
future
vacancies
basis
obliged
indeed
permitted
fire
whites
order
hire
negroes
prefer
negroes
future
vacancies
negroes
hired
give
special
seniority
rights
expense
white
workers
hired
earlier
cong
rec
emphasis
added
title
vii
effect
seniority
rights
existing
time
takes
effect
example
collective
bargaining
contract
provides
event
layoffs
hired
last
must
laid
first
provision
affected
least
title
vii
true
even
case
owing
discrimination
prior
effective
date
title
white
workers
seniority
negroes
emphasis
added
sum
unmistakable
purpose
make
clear
routine
application
bona
fide
seniority
system
unlawful
title
vii
legislative
history
shows
intended
result
even
employer
discrimination
resulted
whites
greater
existing
seniority
rights
negroes
although
seniority
system
inevitably
tends
perpetuate
effects
discrimination
cases
congressional
judgment
title
vii
outlaw
use
existing
seniority
lists
thereby
destroy
water
vested
seniority
rights
employees
simply
employer
engaged
discrimination
prior
passage
act
sure
immunize
seniority
systems
refers
bona
fide
systems
proviso
requires
differences
treatment
result
intention
discriminate
race
national
origin
reading
legislative
history
compels
us
reject
government
broad
argument
seniority
system
tends
perpetuate
discrimination
bona
fide
accept
argument
require
us
hold
seniority
system
becomes
illegal
simply
allows
full
exercise
seniority
rights
employees
company
discriminated
title
vii
enacted
place
affirmative
obligation
parties
seniority
agreement
subordinate
rights
favor
claims
discriminatees
without
seniority
consequence
perversion
congressional
purpose
accept
invitation
disembowel
reading
words
bona
fide
government
us
accordingly
hold
otherwise
neutral
legitimate
seniority
system
become
unlawful
title
vii
simply
may
perpetuate
discrimination
congress
intend
make
illegal
employees
vested
seniority
rights
continue
exercise
rights
even
expense
discriminatees
conclusion
inescapable
even
case
one
discriminatees
incumbent
employees
accumulated
seniority
bargaining
units
although
seems
explicit
reference
legislative
history
discriminatees
already
employed
less
desirable
jobs
rational
basis
distinguishing
claims
persons
initially
denied
job
hired
later
less
seniority
might
absence
discrimination
rejected
distinction
franks
finding
support
anywhere
title
vii
legislative
history
discussed
congress
made
clear
seniority
system
unlawful
honors
employees
existing
rights
even
employer
engaged
discriminatory
hiring
promotion
practices
contrary
mandate
forbid
exercise
seniority
rights
respect
discriminatees
held
inferior
jobs
respect
later
hired
minority
employees
previously
denied
job
anything
latter
group
disadvantaged
franks
indeed
surprising
congress
gave
remedy
one
group
denied
quoting
phelps
dodge
nlrb
seniority
system
litigation
entirely
bona
fide
applies
equally
races
ethnic
groups
extent
locks
employees
jobs
city
drivers
servicemen
discouraged
transferring
jobs
negroes
americans
contrary
overwhelming
majority
white
placing
line
drivers
separate
bargaining
unit
employees
rational
accord
industry
practice
consistent
national
labor
relation
board
precedents
conceded
seniority
system
genesis
racial
discrimination
negotiated
maintained
free
illegal
purpose
circumstances
single
fact
system
extends
retroactive
seniority
discriminatees
make
unlawful
seniority
system
protected
union
conduct
agreeing
maintaining
system
violate
title
vii
remand
district
injunction
union
must
vacated
iii
conclusion
seniority
system
violate
title
vii
necessarily
affect
remedy
granted
individual
employees
remand
litigation
district
employees
suffered
discrimination
entitled
relief
person
may
given
retroactive
seniority
date
earlier
effective
date
act
several
questions
relating
appropriate
measure
individual
relief
remain
however
consideration
petitioners
argue
generally
trial
err
tailoring
remedy
degree
injury
suffered
individual
employee
appeals
qualification
date
formula
sweeps
broad
brush
granting
remedy
employees
shown
actual
victims
unlawful
discrimination
specifically
petitioners
assert
employee
entitled
relief
government
demonstrates
actual
victim
company
discriminatory
practices
employee
apply
job
granted
retroactive
competitive
seniority
employee
elevated
job
ahead
current
line
driver
layoff
status
consider
contentions
separately
petitioners
first
contention
substance
government
burden
proof
case
must
equivalent
outlined
mcdonnell
douglas
green
since
government
introduced
specific
evidence
company
discrimination
employees
argue
district
properly
refused
award
retroactive
seniority
remainder
class
minority
incumbent
employees
mcdonnell
douglas
considered
order
allocation
proof
private
action
challenging
employment
discrimination
held
individual
title
vii
complainant
must
carry
initial
burden
proof
establishing
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
specific
facts
involved
concluded
burden
met
showing
qualified
applicant
member
racial
minority
group
unsuccessfully
sought
job
vacancy
employer
continued
thereafter
seek
applicants
similar
qualifications
initial
showing
justified
inference
minority
applicant
denied
employment
opportunity
reasons
prohibited
title
vii
therefore
shifted
burden
employer
rebut
inference
offering
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reason
rejection
company
union
seize
upon
mcdonnell
douglas
pattern
means
establishing
prima
facie
case
individual
discrimination
decision
case
however
purport
create
inflexible
formulation
expressly
noted
facts
necessarily
vary
title
vii
cases
specification
prima
facie
proof
required
plaintiff
necessarily
applicable
every
respect
differing
factual
situations
importance
mcdonnell
douglas
lies
specification
discrete
elements
proof
required
recognition
general
principle
title
vii
plaintiff
must
carry
initial
burden
offering
evidence
adequate
create
inference
employment
decision
based
discriminatory
criterion
illegal
act
franks
bowman
transportation
applied
principle
context
class
action
franks
plaintiffs
proved
satisfaction
district
bowman
transportation
engaged
pattern
racial
discrimination
various
company
policies
including
hiring
transfer
discharge
employees
despite
showing
trial
denied
seniority
relief
certain
members
class
discriminatees
every
individual
shown
qualified
job
sought
vacancy
available
held
trial
erred
placing
burden
individual
plaintiffs
demonstrating
existence
discriminatory
hiring
pattern
practice
plaintiffs
made
prima
facie
case
discrimination
individual
class
members
burden
therefore
shifted
employer
prove
individuals
reapply
fact
victims
previous
hiring
discrimination
franks
case
thus
illustrates
another
means
title
vii
plaintiff
initial
burden
proof
met
class
alleged
policy
employment
discrimination
upon
proof
allegation
reasonable
grounds
infer
individual
hiring
decisions
made
pursuit
discriminatory
policy
require
employer
come
forth
evidence
dispelling
inference
although
class
actions
necessarily
follow
franks
model
nature
suit
brings
squarely
within
holding
franks
plaintiff
action
government
initial
burden
demonstrate
unlawful
discrimination
regular
procedure
policy
followed
employer
group
employers
see
supra
initial
liability
stage
suit
government
required
offer
evidence
person
ultimately
seek
relief
victim
employer
discriminatory
policy
burden
establish
prima
facie
case
policy
existed
burden
shifts
employer
defeat
prima
facie
showing
pattern
practice
demonstrating
government
proof
either
inaccurate
insignificant
employer
might
show
example
claimed
discriminatory
pattern
product
hiring
rather
unlawful
discrimination
period
alleged
pursued
discriminatory
policy
made
employment
decisions
justify
inference
engaged
regular
practice
discrimination
employer
fails
rebut
inference
arises
government
prima
facie
case
trial
may
conclude
violation
occurred
determine
appropriate
remedy
without
evidence
government
finding
pattern
practice
justifies
award
prospective
relief
relief
might
take
form
injunctive
order
continuation
discriminatory
practice
order
employer
keep
records
future
employment
decisions
file
periodic
reports
order
necessary
ensure
full
enjoyment
rights
protected
title
vii
government
seeks
individual
relief
victims
discriminatory
practice
district
must
usually
conduct
additional
proceedings
liability
phase
trial
determine
scope
individual
relief
petitioners
contention
case
government
course
proving
pattern
practice
already
brought
forth
specific
evidence
individual
discriminatorily
denied
employment
opportunity
must
carry
burden
second
remedial
stage
trial
basic
contention
rejected
franks
case
true
particular
facts
franks
typical
title
vii
suits
question
individual
relief
arise
proved
employer
followed
employment
policy
unlawful
discrimination
force
proof
dissipate
remedial
stage
trial
employer
therefore
claim
reason
believe
individual
employment
decisions
discriminatorily
based
already
shown
maintained
policy
discriminatory
decisionmaking
proof
pattern
practice
supports
inference
particular
employment
decision
period
discriminatory
policy
force
made
pursuit
policy
government
need
show
alleged
individual
discriminatee
unsuccessfully
applied
job
therefore
potential
victim
proved
discrimination
franks
burden
rests
employer
demonstrate
individual
applicant
denied
employment
opportunity
lawful
reasons
see
part
supra
held
district
appeals
error
finding
government
proved
systemwide
pattern
practice
racial
ethnic
discrimination
part
company
remand
therefore
every
minority
group
applicant
position
presumptively
entitled
relief
subject
showing
company
earlier
refusal
place
applicant
job
based
policy
discrimination
appeals
qualification
date
formula
relief
distinguish
incumbent
employees
applied
jobs
appellate
held
showing
classwide
discriminatory
practices
coupled
seniority
system
perpetuates
effects
discrimination
individual
member
class
need
show
unsuccessfully
applied
position
class
excluded
support
award
relief
suggested
practical
matter
member
affected
class
may
well
concluded
application
transfer
white
position
line
driver
worth
candle
company
contends
grant
retroactive
seniority
nonapplicants
inconsistent
purpose
title
vii
remedy
impermissibly
require
company
give
preferential
treatment
employees
solely
race
thrust
company
contention
unless
employee
actually
applied
job
either
initial
hire
transfer
suffered
injury
whatever
discrimination
might
involved
refusal
jobs
actually
applied
government
argues
response
immutable
rule
nonapplicants
nonvictims
contends
determination
whether
nonapplicants
suffered
unlawful
discrimination
necessarily
vary
depending
circumstances
particular
case
government
asserts
specific
facts
case
appeals
correctly
determined
qualified
nonapplicants
likely
victims
therefore
presumptively
entitled
relief
question
whether
seniority
relief
may
awarded
nonapplicants
left
open
decision
franks
since
class
issue
case
limited
identifiable
applicants
denied
employment
effective
date
title
vii
decide
incumbent
employee
failure
apply
job
inexorable
bar
award
retroactive
seniority
individual
nonapplicants
must
given
opportunity
undertake
difficult
task
proving
treated
applicants
therefore
presumptively
entitled
relief
accordingly
analysis
problem
must
begin
premise
scope
district
remedial
powers
title
vii
determined
purposes
act
albemarle
paper
moody
griggs
duke
power
albemarle
noted
primary
objective
title
vii
prophylactic
achieve
equal
employment
opportunity
remove
barriers
operated
favor
white
male
employees
employees
prospect
retroactive
relief
victims
discrimination
serves
purpose
providing
spur
catalyst
causes
employers
unions
employment
practices
endeavor
eliminate
far
possible
last
vestiges
discriminatory
practices
equally
important
purpose
act
make
persons
whole
injuries
suffered
account
unlawful
employment
discrimination
determining
specific
remedies
afforded
district
fashion
relief
particular
circumstances
case
may
require
effect
restitution
franks
thus
held
purpose
congress
vesting
broad
equitable
powers
title
vii
courts
make
possible
fashion
ing
complete
relief
possible
district
courts
merely
power
duty
render
decree
far
possible
eliminate
discriminatory
effects
past
well
bar
like
discrimination
future
albemarle
supra
specifically
franks
decided
must
ordinarily
award
seniority
remedy
unless
exist
reasons
denying
relief
applied
generally
frustrate
central
statutory
purposes
eradicating
discrimination
making
persons
whole
injuries
suffered
quoting
albemarle
supra
measured
standards
company
assertion
person
actually
applied
job
never
awarded
seniority
relief
prevail
effects
injuries
suffered
discriminatory
employment
practices
always
confined
expressly
denied
requested
employment
opportunity
consistently
enforced
discriminatory
policy
surely
deter
job
applications
aware
unwilling
subject
humiliation
explicit
certain
rejection
employer
announce
policy
discrimination
sign
reading
whites
door
victims
limited
ignored
sign
subjected
personal
rebuffs
message
communicated
potential
applicants
subtly
clearly
employer
actual
practices
consistent
discriminatory
treatment
actual
applicants
manner
publicizes
vacancies
recruitment
techniques
responses
casual
tentative
inquiries
even
racial
ethnic
composition
part
work
force
discriminatorily
excluded
members
minority
groups
person
desire
job
translated
formal
application
solely
unwillingness
engage
futile
gesture
much
victim
discrimination
goes
motions
submitting
application
cases
decided
national
labor
relations
act
model
title
vii
remedial
provisions
albemarle
supra
franks
supra
national
labor
relations
board
courts
enforcing
orders
recognized
failure
submit
futile
application
bar
award
relief
person
claiming
denied
employment
union
affiliation
activity
nlrb
nevada
consolidated
copper
enforced
order
board
directing
employer
hire
retroactive
benefits
former
employees
applied
newly
available
jobs
employer
policy
refusing
hire
union
members
see
nevada
consolidated
copper
similarly
application
vain
gesture
light
employer
discrimination
courts
appeals
enforced
board
orders
reinstating
striking
workers
despite
failure
individual
strikers
apply
reinstatement
strike
ended
nlrb
park
edge
sheridan
meats
nlrb
valley
die
cast
mining
smelting
nlrb
see
also
piasecki
aircraft
nlrb
nlrb
anchor
rome
mills
nlrb
lummus
consistent
nlra
model
several
courts
appeals
held
title
vii
cases
nonapplicant
victim
unlawful
discrimination
entitled
relief
application
useless
act
serving
confirm
discriminatee
knowledge
job
wanted
unavailable
acha
beame
hairston
mclean
trucking
bing
roadway
express
industries
denial
title
vii
relief
ground
claimant
formally
applied
job
exclude
act
coverage
victims
entrenched
forms
discrimination
victims
gross
pervasive
discrimination
denied
relief
precisely
unlawful
practices
successful
totally
deter
job
applications
members
minority
groups
per
se
prohibition
relief
nonapplicants
thus
put
beyond
reach
equity
invidious
effects
employment
discrimination
extend
hope
per
se
limitation
equitable
powers
granted
courts
title
vii
manifestly
inconsistent
historic
purpose
equity
secur
complete
justice
duty
courts
title
vii
cases
render
decree
far
possible
eliminate
discriminatory
effects
past
albemarle
paper
moody
conclude
person
failure
submit
application
job
inevitably
forever
foreclose
entitlement
seniority
relief
title
vii
far
cry
however
holding
nonapplicants
always
entitled
relief
nonapplicant
must
show
potential
victim
unlawful
discrimination
necessarily
claiming
deterred
applying
job
employer
discriminatory
practices
always
easy
burden
proving
applied
job
practices
cf
mt
healthy
city
board
education
doyle
burden
met
nonapplicant
position
analogous
applicant
entitled
presumption
discussed
part
supra
government
contends
evidence
presented
case
liability
stage
trial
identified
victims
unlawful
discrimination
fair
degree
specificity
appeals
determination
qualified
nonapplicants
presumptively
entitled
award
seniority
accordingly
affirmed
support
contention
government
cites
proof
extended
pattern
practice
discrimination
evidence
application
minority
employee
job
vain
useless
act
argues
since
class
nonapplicant
discriminatees
limited
incumbent
employees
likely
every
class
member
aware
futility
seeking
job
therefore
deterred
filing
initial
followup
application
agree
scope
duration
company
discriminatory
policy
leave
little
doubt
futility
seeking
jobs
communicated
company
minority
employees
insufficient
known
prospect
discriminatory
rejection
shows
employees
wanted
jobs
may
deterred
applying
show
nonapplicants
actually
wanted
jobs
possessed
requisite
qualifications
differences
jobs
example
desirability
latter
warrant
conclusion
employees
prefer
line
drivers
given
free
choice
indeed
substantial
number
white
city
drivers
subjected
company
discriminatory
practices
apparently
content
retain
city
jobs
order
fill
evidentiary
gap
government
argues
nonapplicant
current
willingness
transfer
position
confirms
past
desire
job
employee
response
notice
entitlement
relief
demonstrates
according
argument
employee
sought
job
first
became
qualified
fill
one
knowledge
company
discriminatory
policy
assumption
falls
short
satisfying
appropriate
burden
proof
employee
transfers
unit
normally
placed
bottom
seniority
board
thus
jeopardy
laid
must
best
suffer
initial
period
bidding
least
desirable
runs
see
supra
chose
accept
appellate
post
hoc
invitation
however
enter
unit
retroactive
seniority
dating
time
first
qualified
willingness
accept
job
security
bidding
power
afforded
retroactive
seniority
says
little
choice
employee
made
previously
given
opportunity
freely
choose
starting
job
may
true
many
nonapplicant
employees
desired
applied
jobs
knowledge
company
policy
discrimination
government
must
carry
burden
proof
respect
specific
individual
remedial
hearings
conducted
district
remand
task
remaining
district
remand
simple
one
initially
make
substantial
number
individual
determinations
deciding
minority
employees
actual
victims
company
discriminatory
practices
victims
identified
must
nearly
possible
recreate
conditions
relationships
unlawful
discrimination
franks
process
recreating
past
necessarily
involve
degree
approximation
imprecision
class
victims
may
include
apply
jobs
well
one
minority
employee
may
denied
vacancy
required
balance
equities
minority
employee
situation
allocating
limited
number
vacancies
discriminatorily
refused
class
members
moreover
victims
identified
rightful
place
determined
district
faced
delicate
task
adjusting
remedial
interests
discriminatees
legitimate
expectations
employees
innocent
wrongdoing
prejudgment
consent
decree
see
supra
company
government
agreed
minority
employees
assume
positions
discriminatorily
denied
exercising
right
job
vacancies
company
terminals
decree
determine
constituted
vacancy
final
order
trial
defined
vacancy
exclude
position
became
available
employees
awaiting
opportunity
return
work
employees
layoff
given
preference
fill
whatever
openings
might
occur
terminals
period
laid
appeals
rejected
preference
held
purely
temporary
vacancies
filled
according
employee
seniority
whether
member
class
discriminated
incumbent
line
driver
layoff
final
contention
concerning
remedy
company
union
argue
trial
correctly
made
adjustment
competing
interests
discriminatees
employees
granting
preference
employees
appeals
erred
disturbing
petitioners
therefore
urge
reinstatement
part
trial
final
order
pertaining
rate
victims
assume
rightful
places
hierarchy
although
directly
controlled
act
extent
legitimate
expectations
nonvictim
employees
determine
victims
restored
rightful
place
limited
basic
principles
equity
devising
implementing
remedies
title
vii
less
formulating
equitable
decree
must
draw
qualities
mercy
practicality
made
equity
instrument
nice
adjustment
reconciliation
public
interest
private
needs
well
competing
private
claims
hecht
bowles
cf
phelps
dodge
nlrb
modifying
franks
powell
concurring
part
dissenting
part
especially
immediate
implementation
equitable
remedy
threatens
impinge
upon
expectations
innocent
parties
courts
must
look
practical
realities
necessities
inescapably
involved
reconciling
competing
interests
order
determine
special
blend
necessary
fair
workable
lemon
kurtzman
opinion
burger
limited
facts
record
decline
strike
balance
district
explain
subordinated
interests
class
members
contractual
recall
expectations
employees
layoff
made
determination
however
considering
class
minority
employees
granted
preference
filling
vacancies
overwhelming
majority
district
subclass
three
composed
employees
respect
neither
government
company
presented
specific
evidence
question
unlawful
discrimination
thus
considered
problem
constituted
vacancy
offered
class
members
may
influenced
relatively
small
number
proved
victims
large
number
minority
employees
information
hand
appeals
redefined
vacancy
context
believed
class
employees
actually
suffered
discrimination
behest
company
union
determination
may
well
influenced
understanding
reasons
discussed
opinion
neither
concept
completely
valid
evidentiary
hearings
conducted
remand
size
composition
class
minority
employees
entitled
relief
may
altered
substantially
hearings
conducted
number
identifiable
victims
consequent
extent
necessary
relief
determined
possible
evaluate
abstract
claims
concerning
equitable
balance
struck
statutory
rights
victims
contractual
rights
nonvictim
employees
determination
best
left
first
instance
sound
equitable
discretion
trial
see
franks
bowman
transportation
supra
albemarle
paper
moody
observe
exercises
discretion
dealing
problem
employees
light
facts
developed
hearings
remand
clearly
state
reasons
meaningful
review
may
appeal
see
franks
supra
albemarle
paper
moody
supra
reasons
discussed
judgment
appeals
vacated
cases
remanded
district
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
named
defendant
suit
freight
predecessor
system
produced
mergers
period
see
currently
terminals
operates
three
canadian
provinces
line
drivers
also
known
drivers
engage
hauling
company
terminals
compose
separate
bargaining
unit
company
distinct
bargaining
units
include
servicemen
service
trucks
unhook
tractors
trailers
perform
similar
tasks
city
operations
composed
dockmen
hostlers
city
drivers
pick
deliver
freight
within
immediate
area
particular
terminal
employees
represented
petitioner
union
following
receipt
evidence
decision
government
company
consented
entry
decree
partial
resolution
suit
consent
decree
constitute
adjudication
merits
company
agreed
however
undertake
minority
recruiting
program
accept
applications
negroes
americans
inquired
employment
whether
vacancies
existed
keep
applications
file
notify
applicants
job
openings
keep
specific
employment
recruiting
records
open
inspection
government
submit
quarterly
reports
district
adhere
certain
uniform
employment
qualifications
respecting
hiring
promotion
line
driver
jobs
decree
provided
future
job
vacancies
company
terminal
filled
first
persons
may
found
individual
class
discriminatees
suffering
present
effects
past
discrimination
race
national
origin
prohibited
title
vii
civil
rights
act
remaining
vacancies
filled
persons
company
obligated
hire
one
negro
person
every
white
person
hired
terminal
percentage
minority
workers
terminal
equaled
percentage
minority
group
members
population
metropolitan
area
surrounding
terminal
finally
company
agreed
pay
full
settlement
backpay
obligations
sum
individual
payments
exceeding
paid
alleged
individual
class
discriminatees
identified
government
decree
partial
resolution
suit
narrowed
scope
litigation
district
still
determine
whether
unlawful
discrimination
occurred
identify
actual
discriminatees
entitled
fill
future
job
vacancies
decree
validity
contract
seniority
system
also
remained
decision
question
whether
discriminatees
awarded
additional
equitable
relief
retroactive
seniority
district
memorandum
decision
reported
fep
cases
epd
government
seek
relief
negroes
americans
hired
particular
terminal
date
terminal
first
employed
minority
group
member
line
driver
see
supra
employee
class
joined
company
july
date
initial
employment
rather
effective
date
title
vii
determine
competitive
seniority
subclasses
individuals
third
group
found
discriminated
respect
jobs
line
driver
need
discuss
separately
opinion
provision
decree
qualified
one
significant
respect
southern
conference
area
supplemental
agreement
employer
union
line
drivers
employed
terminals
certain
southern
work
modified
seniority
system
modified
system
employee
seniority
confined
strictly
home
terminal
laid
home
terminal
move
another
terminal
covered
agreement
retain
seniority
either
filling
vacancy
terminal
bumping
junior
line
driver
job
vacancy
modified
system
also
requires
new
vacancy
covered
terminal
offered
line
drivers
covered
terminals
filled
person
district
final
decree
amended
slightly
appeals
altered
system
requiring
vacancy
offered
members
three
subclasses
may
filled
line
drivers
terminals
although
opinion
appeals
case
specifically
mention
requirement
vacancy
exist
clear
earlier
later
opinions
requirement
part
fifth
circuit
qualification
date
formula
see
rodriguez
east
texas
motor
freight
rev
grounds
post
cited
sagers
yellow
freight
system
example
class
member
began
tenure
company
january
time
qualified
line
driver
vacancy
existed
competitive
seniority
upon
becoming
line
driver
date
back
january
became
qualified
vacancy
opened
later
date
later
date
used
appeals
also
approved
slight
modification
part
district
order
allowed
class
members
fill
vacancies
particular
terminal
ahead
line
drivers
laid
terminals
see
supra
section
title
vii
ed
supp
provides
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
fail
refuse
hire
discharge
individual
otherwise
discriminate
individual
respect
compensation
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
limit
segregate
classify
employees
applicants
employment
way
deprive
tend
deprive
individual
employment
opportunities
otherwise
adversely
affect
status
employee
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
disparate
treatment
alleged
present
case
easily
understood
type
discrimination
employer
simply
treats
people
less
favorably
others
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
proof
discriminatory
motive
critical
although
situations
inferred
mere
fact
differences
treatment
see
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
dev
undoubtedly
disparate
treatment
obvious
evil
congress
mind
enacted
title
vii
see
cong
rec
remarks
humphrey
bill
simply
make
illegal
practice
use
race
factor
denying
employment
provides
men
women
shall
employed
basis
qualifications
catholic
citizens
protestant
citizens
jewish
citizens
colored
citizens
citizens
claims
disparate
treatment
may
distinguished
claims
stress
disparate
impact
latter
involve
employment
practices
facially
neutral
treatment
different
groups
fact
fall
harshly
one
group
another
justified
business
necessity
see
infra
proof
discriminatory
motive
held
required
theory
compare
griggs
duke
power
mcdonnell
douglas
green
see
generally
schlei
grossman
employment
discrimination
law
blumrosen
strangers
paradise
griggs
duke
power
concept
employment
discrimination
rev
either
theory
may
course
applied
particular
set
facts
pattern
practice
language
title
vii
supra
intended
term
art
words
reflect
usual
meaning
senator
humphrey
explained
pattern
practice
present
denial
rights
consists
something
isolated
sporadic
incident
repeated
routine
generalized
nature
pattern
practice
example
number
companies
persons
industry
line
business
discriminated
chain
motels
restaurants
practiced
racial
discrimination
throughout
significant
part
system
company
repeatedly
regularly
engaged
acts
prohibited
statute
point
single
insignificant
isolated
acts
discrimination
single
business
justify
finding
pattern
practice
cong
rec
interpretation
pattern
practice
appears
throughout
legislative
history
consistent
understanding
identical
words
used
similar
federal
legislation
see
cong
rec
remarks
magnuson
referring
civil
rights
act
cong
rec
remarks
case
remarks
humphrey
remarks
celler
see
also
jacksonville
terminal
ironworkers
local
west
peachtree
tenth
mayton
atlanta
instance
negroes
composed
population
surrounding
metropolitan
area
population
city
proper
company
atlanta
terminal
employed
line
drivers
white
los
angeles
greater
metropolitan
population
city
population
negro
company
two
los
angeles
terminals
single
negro
among
line
drivers
proof
showed
similar
disparities
san
francisco
denver
nashville
chicago
dallas
several
terminals
although
jobs
pay
jobs
district
found
considered
desirable
driving
jobs
means
clear
employees
even
driver
employees
prefer
line
drivers
see
infra
course
title
vii
provides
equal
opportunity
compete
job
whether
thought
better
worse
another
see
hayes
national
lead
two
examples
illustrative
george
taylor
negro
worked
company
city
driver
los
angeles
beginning
late
hearing
white
city
driver
transferred
job
told
terminal
manager
also
like
consider
line
driving
manager
replied
lot
problems
road
different
people
caucasian
et
cetera
stated
feel
company
ready
right
give
us
little
time
come
around
know
taylor
made
similar
requests
months
later
got
similar
responses
never
offered
job
application
feliberto
trujillo
worked
dockman
company
denver
terminal
applied
job
told
personnel
officer
one
strike
asked
told
chicano
far
know
chicano
driver
system
petitioners
argue
statistics
least
comparing
racial
composition
employer
work
force
composition
population
large
never
given
decisive
weight
title
vii
case
conflict
act
section
provides
nothing
contained
subchapter
shall
interpreted
require
employer
grant
preferential
treatment
individual
group
race
national
origin
individual
group
account
imbalance
may
exist
respect
total
number
percentage
persons
race
national
origin
employed
employer
comparison
total
number
percentage
persons
race
national
origin
community
state
section
area
available
work
force
community
state
section
area
argument
fails
case
statistical
evidence
offered
used
support
erroneous
theory
title
vii
requires
employer
work
force
racially
balanced
statistics
showing
racial
ethnic
imbalance
probative
case
one
imbalance
often
telltale
sign
purposeful
discrimination
absent
explanation
ordinarily
expected
nondiscriminatory
hiring
practices
time
result
work
force
less
representative
racial
ethnic
composition
population
community
employees
hired
evidence
longlasting
gross
disparity
composition
work
force
general
population
thus
may
significant
even
though
makes
clear
title
vii
imposes
requirement
work
force
mirror
general
population
see
sheet
metal
workers
local
considerations
small
sample
size
may
course
detract
value
evidence
see
mayor
philadelphia
educational
equality
league
evidence
showing
figures
general
population
might
accurately
reflect
pool
qualified
job
applicants
also
relevant
ibid
see
generally
schlei
grossman
supra
since
passage
civil
rights
act
courts
frequently
relied
upon
statistical
evidence
prove
violation
many
cases
available
avenue
proof
use
racial
statistics
uncover
clandestine
covert
discrimination
employer
union
involved
ironworkers
local
see
also
pettway
american
cast
iron
pipe
brown
gaston
county
dyeing
mach
jacksonville
terminal
parham
southwestern
bell
tel
jones
lee
way
motor
freight
july
january
hundreds
line
drivers
hired
systemwide
either
outside
ranks
employees
filling
jobs
within
company
none
negro
government
exhibit
example
company
hired
new
line
drivers
negro
americans
minority
employees
composed
company
systemwide
work
force
minority
hiring
increased
greatly
presumably
due
least
part
existence
consent
decree
see
company
narrower
attacks
upon
statistical
evidence
precise
delineation
areas
referred
general
population
statistics
government
demonstrate
minority
populations
located
close
terminals
transportation
available
statistics
failed
show
portion
minority
population
suited
age
health
qualifications
hold
trucking
jobs
etc
equally
lacking
force
best
attacks
go
accuracy
comparison
composition
company
work
force
various
terminals
general
population
surrounding
communities
detract
little
government
showing
negroes
americans
hired
overwhelmingly
excluded
jobs
employees
willing
work
access
terminal
healthy
working
age
often
least
sufficiently
qualified
hold
jobs
yet
became
line
drivers
far
less
frequency
whites
see
pretrial
stipulation
summarized
whites
held
driving
jobs
line
drivers
city
drivers
negroes
americans
held
driving
jobs
line
drivers
city
drivers
event
fine
tuning
statistics
obscured
glaring
absence
minority
line
drivers
appeals
remarked
company
inability
rebut
inference
discrimination
came
misuse
statistics
inexorable
zero
company
evidence
apart
showing
recent
changes
hiring
promotion
policies
consisted
mainly
general
statements
hired
best
qualified
applicants
affirmations
good
faith
making
individual
selections
insufficient
dispel
prima
facie
case
systematic
exclusion
alexander
louisiana
company
also
attempted
show
witnesses
testified
specific
instances
discrimination
either
discriminated
suffered
injury
appeals
correctly
ruled
trial
judge
bound
accept
testimony
committed
error
relying
instead
overpowering
evidence
case
appeals
also
correct
view
individual
proof
concerning
class
member
specific
injury
appropriately
left
proceedings
determine
individual
relief
suit
brought
government
act
district
initial
concern
deciding
whether
government
proved
defendant
engaged
pattern
practice
discriminatory
conduct
see
infra
certain
runs
variety
reasons
desirable
others
best
runs
chosen
line
drivers
top
board
list
drivers
arranged
order
seniority
seniority
company
seniority
rights
generally
limited
service
one
particular
terminal
except
modified
southern
conference
area
supplemental
agreement
see
supra
example
negro
qualified
line
driver
race
assigned
instead
job
city
driver
allowed
become
line
driver
loses
competitive
seniority
transfers
jobs
forever
junior
white
line
drivers
hired
whites
rather
negro
henceforth
enjoy
preferable
runs
greater
protection
layoff
although
original
discrimination
occurred
effective
date
title
vii
seniority
system
operates
carry
effects
earlier
discrimination
present
concededly
view
immunize
seniority
systems
perpetuate
effects
prior
discrimination
much
support
apparently
first
adopted
quarles
philip
morris
supp
ed
held
departmental
seniority
system
genesis
racial
discrimination
bona
fide
seniority
system
first
emphasis
added
quarles
view
since
enjoyed
wholesale
adoption
courts
appeals
see
local
papermakers
paperworkers
sheet
metal
workers
local
bethlehem
steel
chesapeake
ohio
insofar
result
quarles
cases
followed
depended
upon
findings
seniority
systems
racially
discriminatory
genesis
racial
discrimination
decisions
viewed
resting
upon
proposition
seniority
system
perpetuates
effects
discrimination
bona
fide
intent
discriminate
entered
adoption
article
national
master
freight
agreement
company
union
effect
date
systemwide
lawsuit
provided
employer
union
agree
discriminate
individual
respect
hiring
compensation
terms
conditions
employment
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
limit
segregate
classify
employees
way
deprive
individual
employee
employment
opportunities
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
discrimination
company
apparently
grievable
breach
provision
contract
legality
seniority
system
insofar
perpetuates
discrimination
nonetheless
remains
issue
case
light
injunction
entered
union
see
supra
decision
today
air
lines
evans
post
largely
dispositive
issue
evans
holds
operation
seniority
system
unlawful
title
vii
even
though
perpetuates
discrimination
subject
timely
charge
discriminatee
course
government
sued
remedy
discrimination
directly
claim
relief
time
barred
simply
additional
reason
hold
seniority
system
unlawful
since
holding
way
enlarge
relief
awarded
see
franks
bowman
transportation
section
face
immunizes
bona
fide
seniority
systems
distinguish
perpetuation
discrimination
also
noted
mcdonnell
douglas
societal
well
personal
interests
sides
equation
broad
overriding
interest
shared
employer
employee
consumer
efficient
trustworthy
workmanship
assured
fair
racially
neutral
employment
personnel
decisions
implementation
decisions
abundantly
clear
title
vii
tolerates
racial
discrimination
subtle
otherwise
asbestos
workers
local
vogler
provides
apt
illustration
union
policy
excluding
persons
related
present
members
blood
marriage
suit
brought
challenge
policy
union
members
white
largely
result
intentional
racial
discrimination
observed
nepotism
requirement
applicable
black
white
alike
face
discriminatory
completely
white
union
present
effect
continued
application
forever
deny
negroes
real
opportunity
membership
minority
report
cong
rec
remarks
hill
remarks
dowdy
remarks
stennis
addition
material
cited
franks
bowman
transportation
see
cong
rec
remarks
celler
remarks
humphrey
remarks
kuchel
senators
clark
case
bipartisan
captains
responsible
title
vii
senate
debate
bipartisan
captains
selected
title
civil
rights
act
leading
proponents
act
parties
responsible
explaining
title
detail
defending
leading
discussion
see
remarks
humphrey
vaas
title
vii
legislative
history
ind
com
rev
full
text
statement
set
franks
bowman
transportation
supra
senator
clark
also
introduced
set
answers
questions
propounded
senator
dirksen
included
following
exchange
question
situation
prevail
respect
promotions
management
function
governed
labor
contract
calling
promotions
basis
seniority
dismissals
normally
labor
contracts
call
last
hired
first
fired
last
hired
negroes
employer
discriminating
contract
requires
first
fired
remaining
employees
white
answer
seniority
rights
way
affected
bill
last
hired
first
fired
agreement
negro
happens
last
hired
still
first
fired
long
done
status
last
hired
race
cong
rec
see
franks
supra
see
franks
bowman
transportation
supra
vaas
supra
reason
reject
contention
proviso
bars
differences
treatment
resulting
intention
discriminate
applies
application
seniority
system
may
perpetuate
past
discrimination
regard
language
justice
department
memorandum
introduced
legislative
hearings
see
supra
especially
pertinent
perfectly
clear
worker
laid
denied
chance
promotion
established
seniority
rules
low
man
totem
pole
discriminated
race
differences
treatment
based
established
seniority
rights
based
race
forbidden
title
cong
rec
legislative
history
amendments
title
vii
summarized
discussed
franks
powell
concurring
part
dissenting
part
way
points
different
result
discussion
franks
indicates
history
susceptible
different
readings
broad
references
perpetuation
discrimination
de
facto
segregated
job
ladders
see
pp
pp
address
specific
issue
presented
case
assumption
authors
conference
report
present
case
law
developed
courts
continue
govern
applicability
construction
title
vii
see
franks
supra
course
foreclose
consideration
issue
importantly
section
title
vii
construe
enacted
views
members
later
congress
concerning
different
sections
title
vii
enacted
litigation
commenced
entitled
little
weight
intent
congress
enacted
unmistakable
case
controls
title
vii
proscribe
denial
fictional
seniority
discriminatees
got
job
recognized
even
quarles
philip
morris
supp
ed
progeny
quarles
stressed
fact
references
legislative
history
employment
seniority
rather
departmental
seniority
local
papermakers
paperworkers
another
leading
case
area
observed
doubt
congress
prevent
reverse
discrimination
meant
protect
certain
seniority
rights
existed
previous
racial
discrimination
example
negro
rejected
employer
racial
grounds
passage
act
hired
claim
outrank
whites
hired
original
rejection
even
though
negro
might
senior
status
past
discrimination
addition
reason
suppose
congress
intended
extend
less
protection
legitimate
departmental
seniority
systems
plantwide
seniority
systems
seniority
measured
number
ways
including
length
time
employer
particular
plant
department
job
line
progression
see
aaron
reflections
legal
nature
enforceability
seniority
rights
harv
rev
cooper
sobol
seniority
testing
fair
employment
laws
general
approach
objective
criteria
hiring
promotion
harv
rev
legislative
history
contains
suggestion
one
system
preferred
see
georgia
highway
express
board
long
held
local
drivers
drivers
constitute
separate
appropriate
units
shown
clearly
defined
homogeneous
functionally
distinct
groups
separate
interests
effectively
represented
separately
bargaining
purposes
view
different
duties
functions
separate
supervision
different
bases
payment
clear
drivers
divergent
interests
employees
city
operations
unit
included
unit
union
properly
remain
litigation
defendant
full
relief
may
awarded
victims
employer
discrimination
fed
rule
civ
proc
see
eeoc
macmillan
bloedel
containers
mcdonnell
douglas
case
involved
individual
complainant
seeking
prove
one
instance
unlawful
discrimination
employer
isolated
decision
reject
applicant
belongs
racial
minority
show
rejection
racially
based
although
mcdonnell
douglas
formula
require
direct
proof
discrimination
demand
alleged
discriminatee
demonstrate
least
rejection
result
two
common
legitimate
reasons
employer
might
rely
reject
job
applicant
absolute
relative
lack
qualifications
absence
vacancy
job
sought
elimination
reasons
refusal
hire
sufficient
absent
explanation
create
inference
decision
discriminatory
one
holding
franks
proof
discriminatory
pattern
practice
creates
rebuttable
presumption
favor
individual
relief
consistent
manner
presumptions
created
generally
presumptions
shifting
burden
proof
often
created
reflect
judicial
evaluations
probabilities
conform
party
superior
access
proof
see
mccormick
law
evidence
ed
james
burdens
proof
rev
see
also
keyes
school
dist
factors
present
franks
although
prima
facie
case
conclusively
demonstrate
employer
decisions
part
proved
discriminatory
pattern
practice
create
greater
likelihood
single
decision
component
overall
pattern
moreover
finding
pattern
practice
changed
position
employer
proved
wrongdoer
finally
employer
best
position
show
individual
employee
denied
employment
opportunity
insofar
reasons
related
available
vacancies
employer
evaluation
applicant
qualifications
company
records
relevant
items
proof
refusal
hire
based
factors
employer
agents
knew
best
factors
extent
influenced
decisionmaking
process
employer
defense
must
course
designed
meet
prima
facie
case
government
mean
suggest
particular
limits
type
evidence
employer
may
use
point
liability
stage
trial
focus
often
individual
hiring
decisions
pattern
discriminatory
decisionmaking
pattern
might
demonstrated
examining
discrete
decisions
composed
government
suits
commonly
involved
proof
expected
result
regularly
followed
discriminatory
policy
cases
employer
burden
provide
nondiscriminatory
explanation
apparently
discriminatory
result
see
supra
cases
cited
therein
federal
courts
freely
exercised
broad
equitable
discretion
devise
prospective
relief
designed
assure
employers
found
violation
eliminate
discriminatory
practices
effects
therefrom
see
cases
cited
infra
case
prospective
relief
incorporated
parties
consent
decree
see
supra
nonapplicants
discussed
part
infra
employees
initially
applied
jobs
hired
jobs
effective
date
act
later
apply
transfer
jobs
part
group
nonapplicants
discussed
infra
nondiscriminatory
justification
offered
company
subject
evidence
government
purported
reason
applicant
rejection
fact
pretext
unlawful
discrimination
mcdonnell
douglas
green
effects
subtle
discriminatory
practices
escaped
scrutiny
federal
courts
provided
relief
practices
designed
discourage
job
applications
members
see
franks
bowman
transportation
public
recruitment
advertising
rev
grounds
carter
gallagher
recruitment
jacksonville
terminal
posting
job
vacancies
job
qualification
requirements
local
ironworkers
supp
wd
dissemination
information
aff
measures
may
effective
preventing
deterrence
future
applicants
afford
relief
persons
past
desired
jobs
intimidated
discouraged
employment
discrimination
limitation
incumbent
employees
also
said
serve
function
actual
job
applications
served
franks
providing
means
distinguishing
members
excluded
minority
group
minority
members
public
large
true
incumbency
case
actual
applications
franks
serve
narrow
might
otherwise
impossible
task
statuses
nonincumbent
applicant
nonapplicant
incumbent
differ
substantially
refused
applicants
franks
denied
opportunity
clearly
sought
issue
resolved
whether
denial
pursuant
proved
discriminatory
practice
resolution
nonapplicant
claim
however
requires
two
distinct
determinations
applied
discrimination
discriminatorily
rejected
applied
mere
fact
incumbency
resolve
first
issue
although
may
tend
support
nonapplicant
claim
extent
shows
willing
competent
work
driver
familiar
tasks
line
drivers
etc
incumbent
claim
applied
job
certainly
superficially
plausible
similar
claim
member
general
public
may
never
worked
trucking
industry
heard
company
prior
suit
inasmuch
purpose
nonapplicant
burden
proof
establish
status
similar
applicant
must
bear
burden
coming
forward
basic
information
qualifications
presented
application
franks
accord
part
supra
burden
employer
show
nonapplicant
nevertheless
victim
discrimination
example
employer
might
show
qualified
persons
chosen
particular
vacancy
nonapplicant
stated
qualifications
insufficient
see
franks
employees
government
sought
transfer
jobs
nearly
held
positions
company
line
drivers
generally
earned
annually
city
drivers
difference
varied
depending
terminal
year
city
drivers
two
california
terminals
los
san
francisco
earned
substantially
line
drivers
terminals
addition
earnings
line
drivers
advantage
required
load
unload
trucks
city
drivers
however
regular
working
hours
required
spend
extended
periods
away
home
family
face
hazards
driving
high
speeds
government
acknowledged
argument
jobs
sense
parallel
may
prefer
one
job
may
prefer
another
district
found
generally
jobs
considered
desirable
driving
jobs
finding
challenged
see
reason
disturb
observe
differences
city
line
driving
said
confidence
minority
employees
free
threat
discriminatory
treatment
chosen
give
city
line
driving
addition
futility
application
appeals
seems
relied
minority
employees
accumulated
seniority
positions
concluding
nonapplicants
unlawfully
deterred
applying
see
government
adopts
theory
arguing
nonapplicant
accrued
time
company
unlikely
applied
transfer
forfeit
competitive
seniority
job
security
went
view
conclusion
part
supra
argument
detracts
rather
supports
nonapplicant
entitlement
relief
extent
incumbent
deterred
applying
desire
retain
competitive
seniority
simply
want
job
requiring
start
bottom
board
nonapplicants
apply
transfer
unwilling
give
previously
acquired
seniority
suffered
lawful
deterrent
imposed
employees
regardless
race
ethnicity
nonapplicant
remedy
cases
limited
solely
relief
may
entitled
discrimination
encountered
time
wanted
take
starting
job
district
final
order
required
company
notify
minority
employee
relief
entitled
claim
employee
required
indicate
within
days
willingness
accept
relief
decision
appeals
relief
seniority
convincing
proof
overt
act
application
job
district
may
find
evidence
employee
informal
inquiry
expression
interest
even
unexpressed
desire
credible
convincing
question
factual
one
determination
trial
judge
paragraph
trial
final
order
provided
vacancy
used
order
shall
include
opening
caused
transfer
promotion
position
outside
bargaining
unit
death
resignation
final
discharge
incumbent
increase
operations
business
ordinarily
additional
employees
put
work
vacancy
shall
exist
laid
employees
seniority
roster
opening
occurs
laid
employees
shall
preference
fill
laid
positions
become
open
without
competition
individuals
granted
relief
case
however
layoff
continues
three
consecutive
years
position
deemed
vacant
right
concerned
compete
position
using
respective
seniority
dates
including
provided
order
trial
use
recall
right
apparently
derived
provisions
agreements
article
national
master
freight
agreement
nmfa
establishes
seniority
rights
employees
covered
agreement
art
eniority
rights
employees
shall
prevail
seniority
shall
broken
discharge
voluntary
quit
three
year
layoff
evident
layoff
provision
nmfa
determines
employee
shall
lose
accumulated
seniority
determine
either
order
layoff
order
recall
subject
terms
nmfa
art
extent
seniority
shall
applied
well
methods
procedures
application
left
supplemental
agreements
art
southern
conference
area
supplemental
agreement
covering
line
drivers
southern
conference
also
provides
complete
loss
seniority
rights
layoff
art
provides
event
reduction
force
last
employee
hired
shall
laid
first
force
increased
employees
returned
work
reverse
order
laid
art
order
layoff
recall
however
limited
nmfa
least
two
situations
involving
influx
employees
outside
terminal
art
merger
solvent
company
branch
closing
transfer
operations
another
branch
cases
nmfa
provides
dovetailing
seniority
rights
active
employees
two
facilities
involved
ibid
see
also
nmfa
art
honoring
military
selective
service
act
nmfa
also
recognizes
questions
accrual
interpretation
application
seniority
rights
may
arise
covered
general
rules
set
forth
provides
procedure
resolution
unforeseen
seniority
problems
art
presumably
applies
persons
claiming
discriminatory
denial
jobs
seniority
violation
art
prohibits
discrimination
hiring
well
classification
employees
deprive
employment
opportunities
account
race
national
origin
see
supra
district
apparently
consider
provisions
determined
recall
rights
employees
layoff
briefs
petitioners
also
challenge
trial
modification
interterminal
transfer
rights
line
drivers
southern
conference
see
supra
question
presented
either
petition
certiorari
therefore
properly
us
rule
disposition
claim
presented
however
permit
trial
reconsider
part
balance
struck
dealing
issue
petitioners
argue
permit
victim
discrimination
use
seniority
bid
job
recall
employees
layoff
amount
racial
ethnic
preference
violation
act
section
provides
support
argument
provides
title
vii
require
employer
grant
preferential
treatment
group
order
rectify
imbalance
composition
employer
work
force
makeup
population
large
see
supra
allow
identifiable
victims
unlawful
discrimination
participate
layoff
recall
kind
preference
prohibited
discriminatee
ultimately
allowed
secure
position
line
driver
question
decide
bidding
power
inherent
seniority
preference
based
race
see
franks
powell
concurring
part
dissenting
part
factors
number
victims
number
employees
affected
alternatives
available
economic
circumstances
industry
may
also
relevant
exercise
district
discretion
see
franks
supra
powell
concurring
part
dissenting
part
justice
marshall
justice
brennan
joins
concurring
part
dissenting
part
agree
proved
petitioner
guilty
pattern
practice
discriminating
blacks
americans
hiring
line
drivers
also
agree
incumbent
employees
show
applied
job
applied
company
unlawful
acts
presumptively
entitled
full
measure
relief
set
forth
decision
last
term
franks
bowman
transportation
agree
title
vii
permits
petitioners
treat
negro
line
drivers
differently
drivers
hired
company
time
simply
former
drivers
prevented
company
acquiring
seniority
road
therefore
dissent
aspect
holding
limitations
scope
remedy
follow
quite
properly
acknowledges
ante
seniority
provision
issue
clearly
violate
title
vii
absent
exempts
least
seniority
systems
reach
act
title
vii
prohibits
employer
classify
ing
employees
way
deprive
tend
deprive
individual
employment
opportunities
otherwise
adversely
affect
status
employee
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
supp
act
practices
procedures
tests
neutral
face
even
neutral
terms
intent
maintained
operate
freeze
status
quo
prior
discriminatory
employment
practices
griggs
duke
power
emphasis
added
petitioners
seniority
system
precisely
awards
choicest
jobs
benefits
possessing
credential
seniority
due
past
discrimination
blacks
employees
prevented
acquiring
consequently
time
negro
worker
hired
old
segregated
system
bids
white
worker
job
slot
old
racial
classification
reasserts
negro
suffers
anew
employer
previous
bias
local
papermakers
paperworkers
wisdom
cert
denied
also
concedes
touch
understatement
view
immunize
seniority
systems
perpetuate
effects
prior
discrimination
much
support
ante
without
single
dissent
six
courts
appeals
held
cases
two
courts
appeals
indicated
agreement
also
without
dissent
unbroken
line
cases
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
reached
conclusion
overwhelming
weight
scholarly
opinion
accord
yet
second
time
term
see
general
electric
gilbert
majority
overturns
unanimous
conclusion
courts
appeals
eeoc
concerning
scope
title
vii
respectfully
disagree
initially
important
bear
mind
title
vii
remedial
statute
designed
eradicate
certain
invidious
employment
practices
evils
aimed
defined
broadly
fail
hire
discharge
otherwise
discriminate
respect
compensation
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
limit
segregate
classify
way
deprive
tend
deprive
individual
employment
opportunities
otherwise
adversely
affect
status
supp
emphasis
added
section
carves
exemption
broad
prohibitions
accordingly
longstanding
principles
statutory
construction
act
given
liberal
interpretation
exemptions
sweep
narrowed
limited
effect
remedy
intended
piedmont
northern
icc
see
also
spokane
inland
dickson
pet
story
unless
seniority
system
perpetuates
discrimination
falls
plainly
unmistakably
within
terms
spirit
phillips
walling
system
deemed
unprotected
submit
whatever
else
may
true
section
applicability
systems
perpetuate
past
discrimination
plainly
unmistakably
clear
language
provides
anything
clear
support
holding
section
provides
pertinent
part
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
apply
different
standards
compensation
different
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
pursuant
bona
fide
seniority
system
provided
differences
result
intention
discriminate
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
emphasis
added
explicit
statements
legislative
history
title
vii
warrant
radical
reconstruction
proviso
three
documents
placed
congressional
record
senator
clark
concerning
seniority
written
many
weeks
amendment
containing
introduced
accordingly
specifically
discuss
meaning
proviso
importantly
none
documents
addresses
general
problem
seniority
systems
perpetuate
discrimination
surprisingly
congress
simply
think
subtleties
enacting
comprehensive
pathbreaking
civil
rights
act
mind
dispositive
absent
unambiguous
statutory
language
authoritative
statement
legislative
history
legalizing
seniority
systems
continue
past
wrongs
see
said
exemption
plainly
unmistakably
applies
ii
even
agree
case
properly
decided
basis
inferences
congress
intent
still
accept
holding
view
legislative
history
civil
rights
act
support
conclusion
congress
intended
legalize
seniority
systems
perpetuate
discrimination
administrative
legislative
developments
since
positively
refute
conclusion
decision
uphold
seniority
systems
perpetuate
discrimination
seniority
systems
treat
negroes
americans
become
line
drivers
new
employees
even
though
effective
date
title
vii
persons
discriminatorily
assigned
jobs
accumulated
seniority
explained
single
ante
relies
almost
entirely
air
lines
evans
post
like
instant
decision
evans
devoid
analysis
legislative
history
simply
asserts
conclusion
single
paragraph
base
decision
strength
evans
sheer
bootstrapping
objectively
examined
legislative
history
compelled
reach
opposite
conclusion
stated
last
term
apparent
thrust
directed
toward
defining
illegal
discriminatory
practice
instances
operation
seniority
system
challenged
perpetuating
effects
discrimination
occurring
prior
effective
date
act
franks
bowman
transportation
emphasis
added
congress
concerned
seniority
expectations
developed
prior
enactment
title
vii
expectations
arising
thereafter
extent
expectations
dependent
whites
benefiting
unlawful
discrimination
thus
paragraph
interpretive
memorandum
dealing
seniority
systems
begins
title
vii
effect
established
seniority
rights
effect
prospective
retrospective
cong
rec
emphasis
added
title
vii
effect
seniority
rights
existing
time
takes
effect
example
collective
bargaining
contract
provides
event
layoffs
hired
last
must
laid
first
provision
affected
title
vii
true
even
case
owing
discrimination
prior
effective
date
title
white
workers
seniority
negroes
differences
treatment
based
established
seniority
rights
based
race
forbidden
title
emphasis
added
question
employer
directed
abolish
employment
list
discrimination
happens
seniority
answer
bill
retroactive
require
employer
change
existing
seniority
lists
emphasis
added
legislative
history
admittedly
affords
somewhat
stronger
support
conclusion
respect
seniority
systems
perpetuate
discrimination
seniority
systems
treat
negroes
americans
become
line
drivers
new
employees
even
though
persons
discriminatorily
assigned
jobs
accumulated
seniority
effective
date
title
vii
enacting
congress
intended
extend
least
protection
seniority
expectations
developed
prior
effective
date
act
legislative
history
clear
threat
expectations
congress
seeking
avert
nonremedial
fictional
seniority
congress
want
minority
group
members
hired
effective
date
act
given
superseniority
simply
members
minority
groups
want
use
seniority
invalidated
whenever
disparate
impact
newly
hired
minority
employees
evils
evils
opponents
title
vii
raised
interpretive
memorandum
addressed
acknowledges
seems
explicit
reference
legislative
history
discriminatees
already
employed
less
desirable
jobs
ante
task
assuming
still
case
properly
decided
basis
imputed
legislative
intent
put
question
choice
likely
congress
made
burnet
guggenheim
cardozo
focused
problem
validated
invalidated
seniority
systems
perpetuate
discrimination
answer
question
devastating
impact
today
holding
validating
systems
must
fully
understood
prior
blacks
americans
able
find
employment
assigned
lowest
paid
menial
jobs
many
industries
throughout
nation
especially
south
many
factories
blacks
hired
laborers
whites
trained
given
skilled
positions
transportation
industry
blacks
become
porters
steel
plants
blacks
assigned
coke
ovens
blasting
furnaces
hotter
dirtier
places
employment
holds
essence
incumbent
employees
entitled
equal
opportunity
advance
desirable
jobs
take
advantage
opportunity
must
pay
price
must
surrender
seniority
accumulated
old
jobs
many
price
high
locked
previous
positions
even
willing
pay
price
reconcile
forever
behind
subsequently
hired
whites
discriminatorily
assigned
thus
equal
opportunity
remain
distant
dream
incumbent
employees
aware
nothing
legislative
history
civil
rights
act
suggest
congress
focused
fact
nonetheless
decided
write
entire
generation
employees
believe
congress
enacted
title
vii
agreed
postpone
one
generation
achievement
economic
equality
backers
title
viewed
economic
equality
practical
necessity
moral
imperative
well
aware
corrosive
impact
employment
discrimination
victims
society
generally
sought
therefore
eliminate
discriminatory
practices
devices
fostered
racially
stratified
job
environments
disadvantage
minority
citizens
mcdonnell
douglas
green
see
also
griggs
duke
power
alexander
make
persons
whole
injuries
suffered
account
unlawful
employment
discrimination
albemarle
paper
moody
short
congress
wanted
enable
black
workers
assume
rightful
place
society
course
true
congress
willing
invalidate
seniority
systems
wholesale
basis
pursuit
goal
plaintiff
suing
behalf
incumbent
minority
group
employees
seek
overturn
petitioners
seniority
system
seeks
time
actually
worked
minority
group
jobs
recognized
equal
majority
group
time
local
papermakers
paperworkers
within
existing
seniority
system
admittedly
recognition
impinge
seniority
expectations
white
employees
developed
prior
effective
date
act
enacting
title
vii
congress
manifested
willingness
precisely
example
interpretive
memorandum
see
supra
makes
clear
title
vii
prohibits
unions
employers
using
discriminatory
waiting
lists
developed
prior
effective
date
title
making
selections
jobs
training
programs
date
cong
rec
prohibition
necessarily
disrupt
expectations
lists
generally
fact
congress
made
title
vii
effective
shortly
enactment
demonstrates
expectations
developed
prior
passage
act
considered
sacrosanct
since
title
vii
general
ban
employment
discrimination
inevitably
interfered
expectations
whites
anticipated
benefiting
continued
discrimination
thus
complete
agreement
judge
butzner
conclusion
seminal
decision
quarles
philip
morris
supp
ed
apparent
congress
intend
freeze
entire
generation
negro
employees
discriminatory
patterns
existed
act
legislative
history
leaves
doubt
concerning
section
applicability
seniority
systems
perpetuate
either
discrimination
doubt
entirely
dispelled
two
subsequent
developments
ignores
developments
submit
critical
first
score
decisions
beginning
least
early
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
consistently
held
seniority
systems
perpetuate
prior
discrimination
unlawful
may
retreated
see
general
electric
gilbert
prior
view
interpretations
eeoc
entitled
great
deference
albemarle
paper
moody
supra
quoting
griggs
duke
power
supra
sweep
aside
eeoc
consistent
interpretation
statute
administers
require
compelling
indications
wrong
espinoza
farah
mfg
quoting
red
lion
broadcasting
fcc
find
indications
opinion
second
congress
enacted
equal
employment
opportunity
act
pub
stat
amending
title
vii
congress
made
clear
approved
lower
decisions
invalidating
seniority
systems
perpetuate
discrimination
congress
aware
cases
evident
senate
house
committee
reports
cite
two
leading
decisions
well
several
prominent
law
review
articles
although
congress
took
action
respect
lower
opinions
dissatisfied
made
attempt
overrule
seniority
cases
contrary
senate
house
reports
expressed
approval
perpetuation
principle
applied
seniority
systems
invoked
principle
justify
committees
recommendations
extend
title
vii
coverage
state
local
government
employees
expand
powers
eeoc
moreover
analysis
conference
committee
bill
prepared
placed
congressional
record
floor
managers
bill
stated
language
hardly
explicit
franks
bowman
transportation
areas
specific
contrary
intention
indicated
assumed
present
case
law
continue
govern
applicability
construction
title
vii
cong
rec
perhaps
important
explaining
section
act
empowers
eeoc
prevent
person
engaging
unlawful
employment
practice
set
forth
section
supp
analysis
declared
unlawful
employment
practices
encompassed
sections
enumerated
original
act
defined
expanded
courts
remain
effect
cong
rec
emphasis
added
last
term
concluded
legislative
materials
reviewed
completely
answer
argument
congress
somehow
intended
seniority
relief
less
available
backpay
remedy
discrimination
franks
bowman
transportation
supra
anything
materials
provide
even
complete
answer
argument
congress
somehow
intended
immunize
seniority
systems
perpetuate
past
discrimination
extent
today
decision
grants
immunity
systems
respectfully
dissent
stating
task
nonapplicants
face
proving
treated
like
applicants
difficult
ante
understand
simply
addressing
facts
case
may
well
cases
jobs
nonapplicants
seek
clearly
desirable
present
jobs
proving
employer
discrimination
nonapplicants
previously
applied
anything
difficult
even
present
case
however
believe
unnecessarily
adds
nonapplicants
burden
agree
proof
nonapplicant
current
willingness
accept
job
dispositive
question
whether
company
discrimination
deterred
nonapplicant
applying
past
agree
current
willingness
says
little
see
ante
past
willingness
view
well
leave
questions
sort
concerning
weight
given
particular
pieces
evidence
district
courts
rather
attempting
resolve
overly
broad
ultimately
meaningless
generalizations
acha
beame
bethlehem
steel
nance
union
carbide
cert
pending
nos
patterson
american
tobacco
cert
denied
russell
american
tobacco
cert
denied
hairston
mclean
trucking
chesapeake
ohio
cert
denied
sub
nom
railroad
trainmen
robinson
lorillard
cert
dismissed
griggs
duke
power
rev
grounds
swint
sagers
yellow
freight
system
sabala
western
gillette
cert
pending
nos
gamble
birmingham
southern
resendis
lee
way
motor
freight
herrera
yellow
freight
system
carey
greyhound
bus
pettway
american
cast
iron
pipe
johnson
goodyear
tire
rubber
bing
roadway
express
georgia
power
jacksonville
terminal
cert
denied
long
georgia
kraft
taylor
armco
steel
local
papermakers
paperworkers
cert
denied
eeoc
detroit
edison
cert
pending
nos
palmer
general
mills
head
timken
roller
bearing
bailey
american
tobacco
rogers
international
paper
summarily
vacated
remanded
industries
gibson
longshoremen
navajo
freight
lines
leading
case
line
district
decision
quarles
philip
morris
supp
ed
bowe
colgate
palmolive
jones
lee
way
motor
freight
cert
denied
agree
ante
results
large
number
quarles
line
cases
survive
today
decision
instant
seniority
system
rational
accord
industry
practice
consistent
nlrb
precedents
genesis
racial
discrimination
negotiated
maintained
free
illegal
purpose
ante
distinguishes
facts
case
many
prior
decisions
cch
empl
prac
guide
cch
eeoc
decisions
blumrosen
seniority
equal
employment
opportunity
glimmer
hope
rutgers
rev
cooper
sobol
seniority
testing
fair
employment
laws
general
approach
objective
criteria
hiring
promotion
harv
rev
fine
plant
seniority
minority
employees
title
vii
effect
layoffs
rev
gould
seniority
black
worker
reflections
quarles
implications
texas
rev
poplin
fair
employment
depressed
economy
layoff
problem
ucla
rev
ross
reconciling
plant
seniority
affirmative
action
new
york
university
annual
conference
labor
developments
law
employment
discrimination
title
vii
civil
rights
act
harv
rev
comment
last
hired
first
fired
seniority
layoffs
title
vii
questions
liability
remedy
colum
law
soc
prob
note
problem
last
hired
first
fired
retroactive
seniority
remedy
title
vii
rev
note
last
hired
first
fired
layoffs
title
vii
harv
rev
note
title
vii
seniority
discrimination
incumbent
negro
harv
rev
comment
title
vii
seniority
systems
back
foot
line
rev
comment
layoffs
title
vii
conflict
seniority
equal
employment
opportunities
rev
duke
rev
three
documents
quoted
full
franks
bowman
transportation
nn
substantial
part
today
decision
ante
interpretive
memorandum
cong
rec
justice
department
reply
arguments
made
senator
hill
senator
clark
response
dirksen
memorandum
placed
congressional
record
april
read
aloud
debates
amendment
presented
senator
dirksen
may
general
statements
also
made
course
debates
concerning
title
vii
impact
seniority
statements
add
nothing
analysis
contained
documents
see
cellar
humphrey
kuchel
keating
mcculloch
amending
title
vii
congress
acknowledged
prior
naivete
employment
discrimination
tended
viewed
series
isolated
distinguishable
events
part
due
part
identifiable
individual
organization
experience
shown
view
false
see
understanding
underlies
franks
holding
constructive
seniority
presumptively
correct
remedy
discriminatory
refusals
hire
even
though
awarding
seniority
necessarily
disrupts
expectations
employees
detailed
attack
title
vii
effect
seniority
rights
voiced
minority
report
house
judiciary
committee
report
sess
provisions
act
grant
power
destroy
union
seniority
extent
actions
taken
destroy
seniority
system
unknown
unknowable
power
granted
bill
carpenters
hiring
hall
say
men
awaiting
call
first
seniority
white
carpenters
union
forced
pass
favor
carpenters
beneath
seniority
stipulated
race
emphasis
original
senate
opponents
bill
discussed
effects
workers
generally
followed
line
although
principal
argument
advanced
senate
title
vii
require
preferential
hiring
minorities
see
cong
rec
hill
stennis
russell
memorandum
title
vii
effect
established
seniority
rights
thus
example
business
discriminating
past
result
working
force
title
comes
effect
employer
obligation
simply
fill
future
vacancies
nondiscriminatory
basis
obliged
indeed
permitted
fire
whites
order
hire
negroes
prefer
negroes
future
vacancies
negroes
hired
give
special
seniority
rights
expense
white
workers
remaining
documents
see
supra
phrased
generally
entirely
consistent
focus
senators
clark
case
johnson
goodyear
tire
rubber
industries
griggs
duke
power
carey
greyhound
bus
jacksonville
terminal
bethlehem
steel
effect
explains
contrary
assertion
ante
rational
basis
distinguishing
claims
persons
already
employed
less
desirable
jobs
persons
initially
denied
job
although
denying
constructive
seniority
latter
group
prevent
assuming
position
occupied
discrimination
deter
moving
higher
paying
jobs
comparing
incumbent
employees
discriminatees
refused
jobs
however
assumes
must
mean
latter
group
need
given
constructive
seniority
later
hired
clear
effect
however
prevent
persons
discriminated
obtaining
special
seniority
rights
members
minority
groups
see
supra
although
true
notes
ante
quarles
papermakers
courts
concluded
persons
refused
jobs
prior
act
need
given
fictional
seniority
eeoc
cch
eeoc
decisions
several
commentators
cooper
sobol
supra
note
supra
harv
rejected
conclusion
recent
decisions
questioned
watkins
steel
workers
see
cong
rec
remarks
humphrey
remarks
kuchel
remarks
clark
pt
see
sources
cited
supra
one
commentator
stated
statute
conflicts
one
hand
congress
wish
protect
established
seniority
rights
intended
expedite
black
integration
economic
mainstream
end
de
facto
discrimination
replaced
slavery
end
civil
war
poplin
supra
see
also
gould
supra
congress
intended
bring
integrated
work
force
merely
create
paper
plan
meaningless
negro
workers
acceptable
legislative
intent
past
discrimination
one
requires
unions
employers
root
past
discrimination
embodied
presently
nondiscriminatory
seniority
arrangements
black
white
workers
equal
job
advancement
rights
see
cases
cited
supra
national
labor
relations
board
reached
similar
conclusion
interpreting
national
labor
relations
act
et
seq
local
electrical
workers
enforced
board
held
union
hiring
hall
commits
present
acts
discrimination
makes
referrals
based
experience
past
union
denied
nonunion
members
opportunity
develop
experience
see
also
houston
maritime
enforcement
denied
example
act
added
definitional
section
title
vii
supp
new
subsection
defining
religion
include
religious
observance
practice
well
belief
subsection
added
provide
statutory
basis
eeoc
formulate
guidelines
discrimination
religion
challenged
dewey
reynolds
metal
company
cir
affirmed
equally
divided
cong
rec
analysis
equal
employment
opportunity
act
prepared
sens
williams
javits
dewey
questioned
authority
eeoc
define
religion
encompass
religious
practices
dewey
reynolds
metals
acknowledging
naive
assumptions
civil
rights
act
see
supra
committee
reports
went
state
employment
discrimination
viewed
today
far
complex
pervasive
phenomenon
experts
familiar
subject
generally
describe
problem
terms
systems
effects
rather
simply
intentional
wrongs
literature
subject
replete
discussions
example
mechanics
seniority
lines
progression
perpetuation
present
effect
discriminatory
practices
various
institutional
devices
short
problem
one
whose
resolution
many
instances
requires
expert
assistance
also
technical
perception
problem
exists
first
instance
system
complained
unlawful
see
addition
discussing
pattern
practice
suits
recommendation
transfer
power
bring
eeoc
house
report
singled
several
seniority
cases
including
papermakers
examples
suits
contributed
significantly
federal
effort
combat
employment
discrimination
supra
difficult
imagine
congress
better
address
ed
specific
issue
presented
case
ante
referring
mechanics
seniority
perpetuation
present
effect
discriminatory
practices
citing
quarles
papermakers
reports
stated
state
local
governments
discriminated
past
existence
discrimination
perpetuated
institutional
overt
discriminatory
practices
de
facto
segregated
job
ladders
supra
supra
points
made
debate
house
senate
cong
rec
remarks
williams
cong
rec
remarks
perkins
senate
report
stated
expected
administrative
process
commission
continue
define
develop
approaches
handling
serious
problems
discrimination
involved
area
employment
including
seniority
systems
supra
house
report
argued
administrative
tribunals
better
equipped
handle
complicated
issues
involved
employment
discrimination
cases
issues
perplexed
courts
include
restructuring
progression
lines
seniority
rosters
testing
supra
enacting
new
section
defining
eeoc
powers
reference
act
congress
effectively
sections
judicial
gloss
placed
upon
see
sands
sutherland
statutes
statutory
construction
cases
cited
cf
albemarle
paper
moody
finding
backpay
provision
act
ratified
courts
appeals
decisions
awarding
backpay
unnamed
class
members
filed
charges
eeoc