meacham
et
al
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
aka
kapl
et
argued
april
decided
june
national
government
ordered
contractor
respondent
knolls
reduce
work
force
knolls
managers
score
subordinates
performance
flexibility
critical
skills
scores
along
points
years
service
used
determine
laid
employees
let
go
least
years
old
petitioners
meacham
short
among
laid
filed
suit
asserting
inter
alia
claim
age
discrimination
employment
act
adea
et
seq
show
impact
meacham
relied
statistical
expert
testimony
results
skewed
according
age
rarely
occur
chance
scores
flexibility
criticality
managers
discretionary
judgment
firmest
statistical
ties
outcomes
jury
found
meacham
claim
second
circuit
initially
affirmed
vacated
judgment
remanded
light
intervening
decision
smith
city
jackson
second
circuit
held
knolls
finding
prior
ruling
untenable
applied
business
necessity
standard
rather
reasonableness
test
assessing
employer
reliance
factors
age
layoff
decisions
meacham
carried
burden
persuasion
reasonableness
knolls
factors
held
employer
defending
claim
adea
bears
burden
production
burden
persuasion
reasonable
factors
age
rfoa
affirmative
defense
pp
adea
text
structure
indicate
rfoa
exemption
creates
affirmative
defense
burden
persuasion
falls
employer
rfoa
exemption
listed
alongside
one
bona
fide
occupational
qualifications
bfoq
recognized
affirmative
defense
shall
unlawful
employer
take
action
otherwise
prohibited
subsections
age
bfoq
reasonably
necessary
normal
operation
particular
business
differentiation
based
rfoa
given
statute
lays
exemptions
provision
separate
general
prohibitions
expressly
refers
prohibited
conduct
surprise
spoken
bfoq
rfoa
among
adea
five
affirmative
defenses
trans
world
airlines
thurston
reading
follows
familiar
principle
hen
proviso
carves
exception
body
statute
contract
set
exception
must
prove
javierre
central
altagracia
longstanding
convention
part
backdrop
congress
writes
laws
respects
unless
compelling
reason
think
congress
put
burden
persuasion
side
see
schaffer
weast
given
principle
particular
weight
enforcing
fair
labor
standards
act
corning
glass
works
brennan
also
recognized
adea
enforced
accordance
remedies
procedures
flsa
lorillard
pons
nothing
suggests
congress
meant
march
step
either
general
specifically
flsa
default
rules
placing
burden
proving
exemption
party
claiming
doubt
dispelled
natural
implication
otherwise
prohibited
language
prefacing
bfoq
rfoa
defenses
pp
knolls
argues
rfoa
clause
bars
liability
action
taken
reasons
age
read
mere
elaboration
element
liability
city
jackson
confirmed
prohibition
extends
practices
disparate
impact
inferring
result
part
presence
rfoa
provision
city
jackson
made
clear
action
based
factor
age
premise
liability
negation
defense
thus
assumed
factor
work
case
focus
rfoa
defense
whether
factor
relied
reasonable
pp
business
necessity
test
place
adea
cases
applying
test
rfoa
defense
entail
wasteful
confusing
structure
proof
absence
business
necessity
enquiry
diminish
however
reasons
already
given
reading
rfoa
affirmative
defense
city
jackson
read
implying
burden
proving
defense
falls
plaintiff
confirmed
bfoq
affirmative
defense
see
moreover
referring
wards
cove
interpretation
identical
language
title
vii
city
jackson
rfoa
clause
mind
title
vii
defense
wards
cove
purport
construe
title
vii
defenses
city
jackson
find
assumption
wards
cove
anything
say
statutory
defenses
adea
pp
city
jackson
confirmed
adea
plaintiff
must
isolat
identif
specific
employment
practices
allegedly
responsible
observed
statistical
disparities
trivial
burden
allay
concern
recognizing
employer
burden
persuasion
rfoa
defense
encourage
strike
suits
nudge
plaintiffs
marginal
cases
end
concerns
directed
congress
set
balance
creating
rfoa
exemption
writing
orthodox
format
affirmative
defense
pp
vacated
remanded
souter
delivered
opinion
roberts
stevens
kennedy
ginsburg
alito
joined
thomas
joined
parts
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
thomas
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
breyer
took
part
consideration
decision
case
clifford
meacham
et
petitioners
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
aka
kapl
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
souter
delivered
opinion
provision
age
discrimination
employment
act
adea
stat
amended
et
creates
exemption
employer
actions
otherwise
prohibited
adea
based
reasonable
factors
age
rfoa
question
whether
employer
facing
claim
planning
defend
basis
rfoa
must
produce
evidence
raising
defense
also
persuade
factfinder
merit
hold
employer
must
national
government
pays
private
companies
work
maintaining
nation
fleet
warships
one
contractor
respondent
kapl
knolls
operator
government
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
history
dating
back
first
submarines
navy
department
energy
jointly
fund
knolls
operations
decide
projects
pursue
set
annual
staffing
limits
recent
years
knolls
charged
designing
prototype
naval
nuclear
reactors
training
navy
personnel
run
demands
naval
nuclear
reactors
changed
end
cold
war
fiscal
year
knolls
ordered
reduce
work
force
even
hundred
employees
chose
take
company
ensuing
buyout
offer
knolls
left
jobs
petitioners
meacham
short
among
laid
resulting
involuntary
reduction
force
order
select
layoff
knolls
told
managers
score
subordinates
three
scales
performance
flexibility
critical
skills
scores
summed
along
points
years
service
totals
determined
let
go
salaried
employees
laid
least
years
sued
raising
discriminatory
intent
discriminatory
result
claims
adea
state
law
alleging
knolls
designed
implemented
workforce
reduction
process
eliminate
older
employees
regardless
intent
process
discriminatory
impact
employees
meacham
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
meacham
show
disparate
impact
workers
relied
statistical
expert
testimony
effect
results
skewed
according
age
rarely
occur
chance
scores
flexibility
criticality
managers
discretionary
judgment
firmest
statistical
ties
outcomes
jury
found
meacham
claim
claim
appeals
affirmed
examining
verdict
lens
burden
shifting
scheme
inference
spelled
wards
cove
packing
atonio
see
meacham
supra
knolls
sought
certiorari
vacated
judgment
remanded
proceedings
light
smith
city
jackson
decided
knolls
petition
pending
see
remand
appeals
panel
ruled
favor
knolls
dissent
case
meacham
ii
majority
found
prior
ruling
untenable
applied
wards
cove
business
necessity
standard
rather
reasonableness
test
contrary
city
jackson
latter
standard
meacham
employee
carried
burden
persuasion
dissent
judge
pooler
took
issue
majority
confusing
business
justifications
wards
cove
statutory
rfoa
exemption
read
affirmative
defense
burden
persuasion
falling
defendants
meacham
sought
certiorari
noting
conflicting
decisions
assigning
burden
persuasion
reasonableness
factor
age
appeals
case
placed
employee
show
factor
unreasonable
ninth
circuit
criswell
western
airlines
assigned
employer
show
factor
reasonable
one
fact
criswell
first
took
question
find
well
posed
case
western
air
lines
criswell
granted
certiorari
vacate
judgment
second
circuit
ii
adea
general
prohibitions
age
discrimination
subject
separate
provision
creating
exemptions
employer
practices
otherwise
prohibited
subsections
rfoa
exemption
listed
alongside
one
bona
fide
occupational
qualifications
bfoq
shall
unlawful
employer
take
action
otherwise
prohibited
subsections
age
bona
fide
occupational
qualification
reasonably
necessary
normal
operation
particular
business
differentiation
based
reasonable
factors
age
given
statute
reads
exemptions
laid
apart
prohibitions
expressly
referring
prohibited
conduct
surprise
already
spoken
bfoq
rfoa
provisions
among
adea
five
affirmative
defenses
trans
world
airlines
thurston
looking
statutory
text
lawyers
accept
characterization
matter
course
thanks
familiar
principle
hen
proviso
carves
exception
body
statute
contract
set
exception
must
prove
javierre
central
altagracia
opinion
holmes
see
also
ftc
morton
salt
burden
proving
justification
exemption
special
exception
prohibitions
statute
generally
rests
one
claims
benefits
first
city
nat
bank
houston
citing
morton
salt
supra
longstanding
convention
part
backdrop
congress
writes
laws
respect
unless
compelling
reasons
think
congress
meant
put
burden
persuasion
side
see
schaffer
weast
absent
reason
believe
congress
intended
otherwise
therefore
conclude
burden
persuasion
lies
usually
falls
upon
party
seeking
relief
never
given
reason
heterodox
take
rfoa
clause
nearest
neighbor
prior
cases
recognize
bfoq
clause
establishes
affirmative
defense
claims
disparate
treatment
see
city
jackson
supra
western
air
lines
supra
nn
likewise
given
affirmative
defense
construction
exemption
equal
pay
act
pay
differentials
based
factor
sex
corning
glass
works
brennan
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
took
account
particular
weight
given
interpretive
convention
already
noted
enforcing
fair
labor
standards
act
flsa
general
rule
application
exemption
fair
labor
standards
act
matter
affirmative
defense
employer
burden
proof
focus
makes
principle
construction
instructive
adea
cases
enacting
adea
congress
exhibited
detailed
knowledge
flsa
provisions
judicial
interpretation
willingness
depart
provisions
regarded
undesirable
inappropriate
incorporation
lorillard
pons
remarked
relied
significant
indication
congress
intent
directive
adea
enforced
accordance
remedies
procedures
flsa
quoting
emphasis
deleted
see
also
fogerty
fantasy
applying
reasoning
lorillard
thurston
supra
interpretive
background
hint
text
congress
meant
march
step
either
general
specifically
flsa
default
rules
placing
burden
proving
exemption
party
claiming
principles
prior
cases
mind
find
impossible
look
text
structure
adea
imagine
rfoa
clause
works
differently
bfoq
clause
next
exempt
otherwise
illegal
conduct
reference
item
proof
thereby
creating
defense
burden
persuasion
falls
one
claims
benefits
morton
salt
supra
party
seeking
relief
schaffer
supra
employer
corning
glass
works
supra
doubt
stress
idiom
otherwise
prohibited
prefacing
bfoq
rfoa
conditions
dispel
implication
affirmative
defense
underscored
contrasting
section
adea
issue
public
employees
retirement
system
ohio
betts
way
congress
responded
decision
betts
said
issue
whether
provision
former
version
one
employee
benefit
plans
merely
redefine
elements
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
instead
establish
ed
defense
otherwise
violation
act
although
provision
contained
otherwise
prohibited
kind
language
said
appears
first
reading
describe
affirmative
defense
ibid
nonetheless
thought
natural
view
taken
thurston
overridden
evidence
legislative
history
peculiarity
condition
phrasing
provision
benefit
plan
subterfuge
evade
purposes
adea
parallel
prior
case
construing
analogous
provision
title
vii
analogous
also
contained
condition
year
later
however
congress
responded
betts
enacting
older
workers
benefit
protection
act
pub
stat
avowedly
restore
original
congressional
intent
adea
benefits
provision
read
affirmative
defense
instructive
question
hand
clarifying
specifies
affirmative
defenses
congress
set
burden
many
words
also
added
phrase
otherwise
prohibited
part
preface
text
congress
thus
confirmed
natural
implication
find
otherwise
prohibited
language
refers
excuse
justification
behavior
standing
alone
violates
statute
prohibition
amendment
aftermath
betts
shows
congress
understands
phrase
way
naturally
read
clear
signal
defense
otherwise
prohibited
affirmative
defense
entirely
responsibility
party
raising
knolls
ventures
regardless
rfoa
provision
read
mere
elaboration
element
liability
bars
liability
action
taken
reasons
age
argument
goes
provision
must
directed
justifying
age
discrimination
proof
extenuating
fact
negating
premise
liability
age
answer
argument
however
city
jackson
confirmed
prohibition
extends
practices
disparate
impact
inferring
result
part
presence
rfoa
provision
issue
drew
recognized
distinction
forms
liability
explained
definition
disparate
impact
employer
classifies
employees
without
respect
age
may
still
liable
terms
paragraph
classification
adversely
affects
employee
employee
age
plurality
opinion
scalia
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
expressing
agreement
reasoning
plurality
opinion
finding
basis
deference
eeoc
rather
independent
judicial
decision
emphasized
kinds
employer
activities
otherwise
prohibited
mainly
statute
meant
test
rfoa
condition
cases
allegedly
prohibited
activity
based
age
cases
involving
claims
rfoa
provision
plays
principal
role
precluding
liability
adverse
impact
attributable
nonage
factor
plurality
opinion
thus
city
jackson
made
clear
typical
case
employer
practice
without
respect
age
adverse
impact
though
age
attributable
nonage
factor
action
based
factor
age
premise
liability
first
place
negation
defense
rfoa
defense
case
focused
asserted
fact
factor
work
assume
focus
defense
factor
relied
upon
reasonable
one
employer
using
reasonableness
justification
categorically
distinct
factual
condition
age
necessarily
correlated
particular
way
reasonable
factor
may
lean
heavily
older
workers
younger
ones
unreasonable
factor
might
iii
appeals
majority
rejected
affirmative
defense
reading
arrived
position
burden
proof
question
different
route
read
decision
city
jackson
ruling
business
necessity
enquiry
adea
cases
concluded
rfoa
defense
replaces
therefore
must
conform
burden
persuasion
resting
complaining
party
premise
city
jackson
modified
business
necessity
enquiry
mistaken
alone
reason
enough
reject
approach
although
satisfied
business
necessity
test
place
adea
cases
agree
government
conclusion
stand
way
holding
rfoa
exemption
affirmative
defense
see
brief
amicus
curiae
begin
appeals
inferred
city
jackson
reference
wards
cove
wards
cove
burden
persuasion
employee
business
necessity
enquiry
also
applied
rfoa
defense
gave
short
shrift
reasons
set
part
supra
reading
rfoa
affirmative
defense
burden
employer
think
even
terms
city
jackson
falls
short
supporting
appeals
conclusion
although
city
jackson
contains
statement
wards
cove
interpretation
title
vii
identical
language
remains
applicable
adea
city
jackson
made
two
specific
references
aspects
wards
cove
interpretation
title
vii
might
remain
ed
applicable
adea
cases
one
existence
liability
city
jackson
explained
narrower
adea
cases
title
vii
burden
identifying
particular
practices
allegedly
cause
observed
disparate
impact
employee
burden
adea
title
vii
see
neither
references
course
odds
view
rfoa
affirmative
defense
indeed
city
jackson
reference
wards
cove
read
literally
include
aspects
latter
case
beyond
mattered
city
jackson
untoward
consequences
broader
reading
rule
one
consequence
embraced
meacham
argues
appeals
wrong
place
burden
persuasion
rfoa
defense
employee
right
thinking
city
jackson
adopted
wards
cove
burden
persuasion
meacham
views
one
element
adea
impact
claim
meacham
takes
position
impact
plaintiff
like
negate
business
necessity
order
show
employer
actions
otherwise
prohibited
rfoa
burden
persuasion
employer
role
play
apply
tests
however
force
parties
develop
jury
follow
two
overlapping
enquiries
first
whether
employment
practice
issue
based
factor
age
supported
business
justification
second
whether
factor
reasonable
one
depending
first
enquiry
proceeds
plaintiff
might
directly
contest
force
employer
rationale
else
try
show
employer
invoked
pretext
pointing
example
alternative
practices
less
disparate
impact
see
wards
cove
first
consideration
justifications
employer
offers
use
practices
second
availability
alternative
practices
achieve
business
ends
less
racial
impact
see
also
even
plaintiff
succeeded
one
meacham
scheme
employer
still
avoid
liability
proving
reasonableness
strange
government
says
plaintiffs
already
established
challenged
practice
pretext
intentional
age
discrimination
makes
little
sense
ask
whether
discriminatory
practice
based
reasonable
factors
age
brief
amicus
curiae
emphasis
original
conversely
proving
reasonableness
defense
eliminate
much
point
plaintiff
showing
alternatives
first
place
make
effort
show
alternative
practices
less
discriminatory
effect
besides
prove
pretext
everyone
knows
choice
practice
relying
reasonable
factor
good
enough
avoid
liability
least
developing
reasonableness
defense
substantially
redundant
direct
contest
force
business
justification
especially
enquiries
deal
narrowly
specified
practice
fair
take
remark
wards
cove
city
jackson
requiring
wasteful
confusing
structure
proof
good
way
read
line
city
jackson
implying
burden
proving
defense
falls
plaintiff
obviously
entail
longer
taking
bfoq
clause
affirmative
defense
city
jackson
confirmed
see
city
jackson
rfoa
clause
mind
identical
anything
title
vii
wards
cove
reading
might
adopted
statute
defense
wards
cove
purport
construe
statutory
defenses
title
vii
city
jackson
find
lurking
assumption
wards
cove
anything
say
statutory
defenses
adea
never
mind
one
title
vii
iv
mentioned
city
jackson
get
help
prior
reading
title
vii
relying
wards
cove
repeat
plaintiff
falls
short
merely
alleging
disparate
impact
point
ing
generalized
policy
leads
impact
city
jackson
plaintiff
obliged
isolat
identif
specific
employment
practices
allegedly
responsible
observed
statistical
disparities
ibid
quoting
wards
cove
supra
emphasis
original
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
aim
requirement
city
jackson
said
avoid
result
employers
potentially
liable
myriad
innocent
causes
may
lead
statistical
imbalances
quoting
wards
cove
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
outcome
case
shows
requirement
bite
one
sufficient
reason
rejecting
employees
challenge
ha
done
little
point
pay
plan
issue
relatively
less
generous
older
workers
younger
workers
ha
identified
specific
test
requirement
practice
within
pay
plan
ha
adverse
impact
older
workers
city
jackson
supra
identifying
specific
practice
trivial
burden
allay
concern
raised
knolls
amici
fear
recognizing
employer
burden
persuasion
rfoa
defense
impact
claims
encourage
strike
suits
nudge
plaintiffs
marginal
cases
turn
inducing
employers
alter
business
practices
order
avoid
sued
see
brief
general
electric
amicus
curiae
also
point
thing
stake
case
gap
production
persuasion
nobody
saying
even
burden
production
placed
plaintiff
cf
schaffer
burden
persuasion
answers
party
loses
evidence
closely
balanced
truth
however
cases
evidentiary
equipoise
plainly
reasonable
employer
factor
age
shorter
step
employer
producing
evidence
raising
defense
persuading
factfinder
defense
meritorious
mainly
cases
reasonableness
factor
obscure
reason
employer
evidence
reveal
convincing
going
production
persuasion
said
denying
putting
employers
work
persuading
factfinders
choices
reasonable
makes
harder
costlier
defend
employers
merely
bore
burden
production
doubt
sometimes
affect
way
employers
business
employees
end
day
amici
concerns
directed
congress
set
balance
creating
rfoa
exemption
writing
orthodox
format
affirmative
defense
read
way
congress
wrote
said
congress
took
account
distinctive
nature
age
discrimination
need
preserve
fair
degree
leeway
employment
decisions
effects
correlate
age
put
rfoa
clause
adea
significantly
narrow
ing
coverage
city
jackson
outcome
employer
city
jackson
shows
surprising
certain
employment
criteria
routinely
used
may
reasonable
despite
adverse
impact
older
workers
group
case
realize
appeals
showed
hesitation
finding
knolls
prevailed
rfoa
defense
though
expressed
conclusion
terms
meacham
failure
meet
burden
persuasion
whether
outcome
different
burden
properly
placed
employer
best
left
first
instance
judgment
appeals
vacated
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
justice
breyer
took
part
consideration
decision
case
clifford
meacham
et
petitioners
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
aka
kapl
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
scalia
concurring
judgment
join
majority
opinion
answers
two
questions
congress
left
sound
judgment
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
represented
solicitor
general
brief
signed
commission
general
counsel
commission
takes
position
provision
affirmative
defense
employer
bears
burden
proof
suits
brought
age
discrimination
employment
act
adea
provision
replaces
test
wards
cove
packing
atonio
neither
position
contrived
case
indeed
commission
arguably
held
view
point
nearly
years
see
fed
reg
although
regulation
applied
cases
involving
discriminatory
treatment
cfr
even
covers
disparate
treatment
see
ante
logic
extension
claims
obvious
unavoidable
see
brief
amicus
curiae
least
regulation
contradict
commission
current
position
say
employer
bears
burden
proof
cases
commission
view
test
newly
minted
undermine
commission
never
expressed
contrary
view
factfinder
must
consider
business
necessity
reasonableness
employer
applies
factor
disparate
impact
older
workers
fact
smith
city
jackson
commission
even
considered
relationship
two
standards
used
treat
two
identical
see
cfr
city
jackson
rejected
equation
see
commission
decided
standard
plays
role
adea
claims
see
brief
amicus
curiae
even
proposed
new
rules
setting
forth
position
see
fed
reg
administration
adea
placed
hands
commission
agency
positions
questions
us
unquestionably
reasonable
opinion
ably
shows
defer
agency
views
see
raymond
yates
profit
sharing
plan
hendon
scalia
concurring
judgment
therefore
concur
judgment
vacate
judgment
appeals
clifford
meacham
et
petitioners
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
aka
kapl
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
write
separately
note
continue
believe
claims
cognizable
age
discrimination
employment
act
et
seq
see
smith
city
jackson
joined
kennedy
thomas
concurring
judgment
moreover
disagree
statement
reasonable
factors
age
rfoa
exception
principally
relevant
cases
compare
city
jackson
supra
opinion
concurring
judgment
ante
citing
city
jackson
supra
plurality
opinion
therefore
join
parts
opinion
agree
rfoa
exception
affirmative
defense
arises
cases
although
appeals
erred
placing
burden
proof
petitioners
nonetheless
affirm
claims
issue
claims
footnotes
naval
reactors
program
lowered
knolls
staffing
limit
people
knolls
also
hire
new
employees
work
existing
personnel
total
jobs
go
performance
score
based
worker
two
recent
appraisals
flexibility
instruction
read
rate
employee
flexibility
within
laboratory
documented
skills
used
assignments
add
value
current
future
lab
work
employee
retrainable
lab
assignments
critical
skills
instruction
read
critical
employee
skills
continuing
work
lab
individual
skill
key
technical
resource
naval
reactors
program
skill
readily
accessible
within
lab
generally
available
external
market
app
emphasis
original
comparison
voluntary
buyouts
salaried
workers
least
years
old
risk
involuntary
layoff
therefore
included
rankings
scheme
meacham
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
supp
ndny
expert
cut
data
different
ways
showing
chances
based
population
salaried
workers
based
population
workers
risk
layoff
analysis
broken
sections
company
meacham
taking
wards
cove
steps
turn
appeals
concluded
jury
found
degree
subjective
decision
making
allowed
layoff
procedure
created
disparity
employer
answered
evidence
facially
legitimate
business
justification
need
reduce
workforce
still
retaining
employees
skills
critical
performance
knolls
functions
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
petitioners
prevail
nonetheless
least
one
suitable
alternative
clear
record
knolls
designed
procedure
safeguards
subjectivity
particular
tests
criticality
flexibility
less
vulnerable
managerial
bias
distinguishing
two
tests
mattered
appeals
explained
even
though
may
reasonable
ways
knolls
achieve
goals
held
meacham
one
selected
unreasonable
meacham
ii
citation
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
burden
persuasion
either
test
said
fall
plaintiff
however
employer
bear
ultimate
burden
persuasion
respect
legitimacy
business
justification
citing
wards
cove
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
majority
took
note
textual
signs
rfoa
affirmative
defense
set
aside
city
jackson
emphasized
reasonable
permissible
employment
criteria
correlate
age
thereby
leaving
plaintiffs
prove
criterion
reasonable
judge
pooler
view
jury
permissibly
find
defendants
established
rfoa
based
unmonitored
subjectivity
knolls
plan
implemented
dissenting
opinion
petitioners
also
sought
certiorari
hether
respondents
practice
conferring
broad
discretionary
authority
upon
individual
managers
decide
employees
lay
reduction
force
constituted
factor
age
matter
law
pet
cert
denied
certiorari
question
express
views
need
seek
relief
doubt
looking
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
regulations
burdens
proof
adea
cases
parties
focus
two
think
neither
clearly
answers
question
one
government
disavowed
overtaken
decision
smith
city
jackson
brief
amicus
curiae
noting
cfr
takes
position
survive
city
jackson
regulation
seems
require
showing
business
necessity
part
rfoa
defense
compare
cfr
employment
practice
including
test
claimed
basis
different
treatment
grounds
age
practice
adverse
impact
individuals
within
protected
age
group
justified
business
necessity
city
jackson
supra
unlike
business
necessity
test
asks
whether
ways
employer
achieve
goals
result
disparate
impact
protected
class
reasonableness
inquiry
includes
requirement
second
regulation
take
bit
stretching
cover
cases
text
speaks
terms
disparate
treatment
see
cfr
concerning
use
rfoa
defense
individual
claim
discriminatory
treatment
eeoc
lately
proposed
rulemaking
revise
regulations
eliminating
reference
business
necessity
placing
burden
proof
employer
henever
exception
reasonable
factor
age
raised
fed
reg
mar
proposed
cfr
provision
read
shall
unlawful
employer
observe
terms
bona
fide
employee
benefit
plan
retirement
pension
insurance
plan
subterfuge
evade
purposes
chapter
age
individual
congress
surely
meant
phrase
contradict
express
allocation
burden
amendment
upshot
knolls
suggestion
way
read
word
otherwise
redundant
phrase
otherwise
prohibited
subsection
say
word
must
refer
implying
must
provision
burden
falls
plaintiff
brief
respondents
besides
argument
proves
much
implies
even
bfoq
exemption
affirmative
defense
expressly
rejected
safe
harbor
view
rfoa
provision
see
city
jackson
plurality
opinion
concurring
judgment
describing
safe
harbor
view
factual
causation
describes
practices
deprive
tend
deprive
otherwise
adversely
affect
employees
age
typically
shown
looking
data
revealing
impact
given
practice
actual
employees
see
city
jackson
opinion
cf
wards
cove
packing
atonio
title
vii
specific
causation
shown
prima
facie
case
establish
ed
plaintiff
identifies
specific
employment
practice
linked
statistical
disparity
watson
fort
worth
bank
trust
plurality
opinion
title
vii
cases
statistical
disparities
must
sufficiently
substantial
raise
inference
causation
enquiry
muddled
value
reasonableness
become
factor
artificially
boosting
discounting
factual
strength
causal
link
extent
measured
impact
open
door
incoherent
undershooting
example
defendants
heard
say
impact
somewhat
less
correlated
age
seeing
factor
reasonable
one
overshooting
make
show
impact
correlated
age
factor
reasonable
besides
see
city
jackson
may
reasonable
ways
city
achieve
goals
one
selected
unreasonable
unlike
business
necessity
test
asks
whether
ways
employer
achieve
goals
result
disparate
impact
protected
class
reasonableness
inquiry
includes
requirement