swint
argued
january
decided
april
together
steelworkers
america
et
al
swint
et
also
certiorari
respondent
black
employees
brought
suit
federal
district
petitioners
employer
certain
unions
alleging
title
vii
civil
rights
act
violated
seniority
system
maintained
petitioners
district
found
differences
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
resulting
seniority
system
result
intention
discriminate
race
color
held
therefore
system
satisfied
requirements
act
section
provides
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
apply
different
compensation
standards
different
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
pursuant
bona
fide
seniority
system
provided
differences
result
intention
discriminate
race
appeals
reversed
holding
differences
treatment
employees
seniority
system
resulted
intent
discriminate
thus
violated
although
recognizing
federal
rule
civil
procedure
requires
district
findings
fact
set
aside
unless
clearly
erroneous
appeals
concluded
finding
discrimination
nondiscrimination
finding
ultimate
fact
review
making
independent
determination
allegations
discrimination
though
bound
findings
subsidiary
fact
clearly
erroneous
held
appeals
erred
course
review
district
judgment
pp
showing
disparate
impact
alone
insufficient
invalidate
seniority
system
even
though
result
may
perpetuate
discrimination
absent
discriminatory
purpose
operation
seniority
system
unlawful
employment
practice
even
system
discriminatory
consequences
pp
rule
divide
findings
fact
deal
ultimate
deal
subsidiary
facts
rule
apply
conclusions
law
district
faulted
applying
erroneous
definition
intentional
discrimination
rather
reversed
arriving
appeals
thought
erroneous
finding
whether
differential
impact
seniority
system
reflected
intent
discriminate
account
race
purposes
question
pure
question
fact
subject
rule
standard
discriminatory
intent
means
actual
motive
legal
presumption
drawn
factual
showing
something
less
actual
motive
thus
appeals
may
reverse
district
finding
discriminatory
intent
concludes
finding
clearly
erroneous
rule
pp
appeals
correctly
stated
controlling
standard
rule
conclusion
challenged
seniority
system
unprotected
product
improper
independent
consideration
totality
circumstances
found
record
appeals
concluded
district
erred
failing
consider
certain
relevant
evidence
improperly
made
determination
based
evidence
district
finding
discriminatory
intent
set
aside
error
law
appeals
relieved
usual
requirement
remanding
proceedings
tribunal
charged
task
factfinding
first
instance
pp
white
delivered
opinion
burger
brennan
powell
rehnquist
joined
stevens
filed
statement
concurring
part
post
marshall
filed
dissenting
opinion
blackmun
joined
except
part
post
michael
gottesman
argued
cause
petitioners
briefs
petitioners
robert
weinberg
laurence
gold
jerome
cooper
bernard
kleiman
carl
frankel
samuel
burr
stelzenmuller
filed
briefs
petitioner
elaine
jones
argued
cause
respondents
brief
jack
greenberg
james
nabrit
iii
patrick
patterson
judith
reed
barry
goldstein
lani
fn
solicitor
general
lee
assistant
attorney
general
reynolds
deputy
solicitor
general
wallace
jessica
dunsay
silver
marie
klimesz
constance
dupre
philip
sklover
vella
fink
filed
brief
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
robert
williams
douglas
mcdowell
filed
brief
equal
employment
advisory
council
amicus
curiae
justice
white
delivered
opinion
respondents
black
employees
bessemer
plant
petitioner
company
manufacturer
railway
freight
cars
parts
brought
suit
company
union
petitioners
steelworkers
america
local
collectively
usw
alleging
violations
title
vii
civil
rights
act
stat
amended
et
seq
ed
supp
iv
come
cases
involve
validity
title
vii
seniority
system
maintained
company
usw
district
found
differences
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
resulting
seniority
system
result
intention
discriminate
race
color
app
pet
cert
hereinafter
app
held
therefore
system
satisfied
requirements
act
appeals
fifth
circuit
reversed
find
differences
terms
conditions
standards
employment
black
workers
white
workers
resulted
intent
discriminate
race
hold
system
legally
valid
section
title
vii
title
vii
broad
remedial
measure
designed
assure
equality
employment
opportunities
mcdonnell
douglas
green
act
designed
bar
overt
employment
discrimination
also
practices
fair
form
discriminatory
operation
griggs
duke
power
thus
repeatedly
held
prima
facie
title
vii
violation
may
established
policies
practices
neutral
face
intent
nonetheless
discriminate
effect
particular
group
teamsters
hereinafter
teamsters
act
treatment
seniority
systems
however
establishes
exception
general
principles
section
stat
set
forth
provides
pertinent
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
precisely
happened
cases
following
decision
teamsters
district
held
new
trial
limited
question
whether
seniority
system
instituted
maintained
contrary
section
new
civil
rights
act
app
concluded
noted
discuss
system
adopted
maintained
purposes
wholly
independent
discriminatory
intent
appeals
fifth
circuit
reversed
ii
petitioners
submit
appeals
failed
comply
command
rule
findings
fact
district
may
set
aside
unless
clearly
erroneous
first
describe
findings
district
appeals
certain
facts
common
ground
district
appeals
company
bessemer
plant
unionized
early
unionization
plant
divided
number
different
operational
departments
usw
sought
represent
production
maintenance
employees
plant
elected
bargaining
representative
bargaining
unit
consisting
employees
time
iam
became
bargaining
representative
unit
consisting
five
departments
iam
ceded
certain
workers
bargaining
unit
usw
result
transfer
iam
bargaining
unit
became
white
throughout
period
representation
usw
plant
approximately
half
black
prior
company
openly
pursued
racially
discriminatory
policy
job
assignments
departments
contained
one
job
category
result
departments
racially
mixed
lines
progression
promotion
within
departments
seniority
system
issue
adopted
agreement
seniority
measured
length
continuous
service
particular
department
seniority
originally
exercised
purposes
layoffs
hirings
within
particular
departments
seniority
formally
recognized
promotional
purposes
well
however
seniority
limited
exceptions
exercised
within
departments
employees
transferring
new
departments
forfeited
seniority
seniority
system
remained
virtually
unchanged
suit
brought
district
approached
question
discriminatory
intent
manner
suggested
fifth
circuit
james
stockham
valves
fittings
appeals
stated
teamsters
totality
circumstances
development
maintenance
system
relevant
examining
issue
view
however
four
particular
factors
focus
first
must
determine
whether
system
operates
discourage
employees
equally
transferring
seniority
units
ibid
district
held
system
facially
neutral
applied
equally
races
ethnic
groups
app
although
charges
racial
discrimination
application
held
substantiated
evidence
concluded
system
applied
equally
uniformly
employees
black
white
given
approximately
equal
number
employees
two
groups
quantitatively
neutral
well
second
must
examine
rationality
departmental
structure
upon
seniority
system
relies
light
general
industry
practice
james
supra
district
found
linking
seniority
departmental
age
modal
form
agreements
generally
well
manufacturers
railroad
equipment
particular
app
furthermore
found
basic
arrangement
departments
plant
rationally
related
nature
work
consistent
practices
generally
followed
unionized
plants
throughout
country
questions
raised
necessity
certain
departmental
divisions
found
challenged
lines
division
grew
historical
circumstances
plant
unrelated
racial
discrimination
although
unionization
produce
iam
bargaining
unit
found
usw
charged
racial
bias
response
iam
situation
usw
sought
represent
workers
black
white
plant
company
charged
racial
discrimination
may
existed
iam
company
properly
took
approach
towards
establishment
election
units
bargained
unions
afforded
representational
status
nlrb
without
discriminatory
animus
seniority
system
genesis
period
racial
segregation
certainly
practiced
system
product
bias
system
rather
came
result
colorblind
objectives
union
unlike
structures
institutions
era
arm
segregated
society
foster
discrimination
practiced
custom
plant
app
appeals
addressed
four
factors
james
test
reached
opposite
conclusion
first
held
district
erred
putting
aside
qualitative
differences
departments
blacks
concentrated
dominated
whites
considering
whether
system
applied
equally
whites
blacks
purported
correction
legal
standard
evidence
evaluated
second
rejected
district
conclusion
structure
departments
rational
line
industry
practice
reflect
discriminatory
intent
discussion
brief
focuses
role
iam
certain
characteristics
unique
bessemer
plant
concluded
record
evidence
generally
indicates
arbitrary
creation
departments
company
since
unionization
attendant
adverse
affect
sic
black
workers
individual
differences
departmental
structure
plants
compared
industry
practice
indicative
attempts
maintain
departments
third
considering
genesis
system
appeals
held
district
erred
holding
motives
iam
relevant
correction
legal
error
part
district
excluding
relevant
evidence
stop
however
went
hold
iam
acting
discriminatory
intent
issue
specifically
reached
district
considerations
race
permeated
negotiation
adoption
seniority
system
subsequent
negotiations
thereafter
ibid
fourth
despite
conclusion
third
james
factor
appeals
recited
expressly
set
aside
find
clearly
erroneous
district
findings
respect
negotiation
maintenance
seniority
system
announced
aving
carefully
reviewed
evidence
offered
show
whether
departmental
seniority
system
present
case
bona
fide
within
meaning
title
vii
reject
district
finding
elaborating
disagreement
appeals
stated
analysis
totality
facts
circumstances
surrounding
creation
continuance
departmental
system
leaves
us
definite
firm
conviction
mistake
made
doubt
based
upon
record
case
existence
discriminatory
purpose
obvious
principal
aim
exclude
black
workers
bargaining
unit
goal
ultimately
reached
maneuvers
resulted
unit
interest
increased
membership
acquiesced
discrimination
succeeding
significantly
segregating
departments
within
unit
district
might
reached
different
conclusion
given
role
creation
establishment
seniority
system
due
consideration
ibid
omitted
consider
significant
decision
manner
two
seniority
units
set
creation
various
departments
within
unit
time
certification
years
thereafter
conditions
racial
discrimination
affected
negotiation
renegotiation
system
extent
system
attendant
rule
locked
blacks
least
remunerative
positions
within
company
find
differences
terms
conditions
standards
employment
black
workers
white
workers
resulted
intent
discriminate
race
hold
system
legally
valid
section
title
vii
although
discrimination
vel
non
essentially
question
fact
time
ultimate
issue
resolution
case
expressly
proscribed
finding
discrimination
finding
ultimate
fact
cites
omitted
reviewing
district
findings
therefore
proceed
make
independent
determination
appellant
allegations
discrimination
though
bound
findings
subsidiary
fact
clearly
erroneous
iii
pointing
statement
appeals
similar
statements
title
vii
cases
coming
petitioners
submit
appeals
made
independent
determination
discriminatory
purpose
ultimate
fact
case
error
rule
agree
petitioners
appeals
followed
seems
accepted
rule
circuit
judgment
must
reversed
rule
broadly
requires
findings
fact
set
aside
unless
clearly
erroneous
make
exceptions
purport
exclude
certain
categories
factual
findings
obligation
appeals
accept
district
findings
unless
clearly
erroneous
divide
facts
categories
particular
divide
findings
fact
deal
ultimate
deal
subsidiary
facts
rule
apply
conclusions
law
appeals
therefore
quite
right
saying
district
findings
rest
erroneous
view
law
may
set
aside
basis
district
faulted
misunderstanding
applying
erroneous
definition
intentional
discrimination
reversed
arriving
appeals
thought
erroneous
finding
whether
differential
impact
seniority
system
reflected
intent
discriminate
account
race
question
see
pure
question
fact
subject
rule
standard
question
law
mixed
question
law
fact
previously
noted
vexing
nature
distinction
questions
fact
questions
law
see
baumgartner
rule
furnish
particular
guidance
respect
distinguishing
law
fact
yet
know
rule
principle
unerringly
distinguish
factual
finding
legal
conclusion
reasons
follow
however
little
doubt
factual
nature
requirement
seniority
system
free
intent
discriminate
treating
issues
intent
factual
matters
trier
fact
commonplace
dayton
board
education
brinkman
principal
question
whether
defendants
intentionally
maintained
racially
segregated
school
system
specified
time
past
recognized
issue
essentially
factual
subject
rule
commissioner
duberstein
held
principal
criterion
identifying
gift
applicable
provision
internal
revenue
code
intent
motive
donor
one
inquires
basic
reason
conduct
fact
resolution
issue
determined
ultimate
issue
whether
gift
made
issues
held
questions
fact
subject
rule
yellow
cab
antitrust
case
referred
indings
design
motive
intent
men
act
peculiarly
factual
issues
trier
fact
therefore
subject
appellate
review
rule
justice
black
dissent
yellow
cab
suggested
contrary
approach
relying
griffith
argued
always
necessary
prove
specific
intent
restrain
trade
enough
restraint
result
consequence
defendant
conduct
business
arrangements
approach
however
specifically
precluded
title
vii
cases
challenging
seniority
systems
differentials
among
employees
result
seniority
system
unlawful
employment
practices
unless
product
intent
discriminate
make
sense
therefore
say
intent
discriminate
required
may
presumed
impact
construed
teamsters
must
finding
actual
intent
discriminate
racial
grounds
part
negotiated
maintained
system
finding
appears
us
pure
question
fact
say
discriminatory
impact
part
evidence
considered
trial
reaching
finding
whether
discriminatory
intent
factual
matter
assert
however
discriminatory
intent
finding
fact
made
trial
question
law
mixed
question
law
fact
kind
cases
may
allow
appellate
review
facts
see
satisfy
legal
concept
discriminatory
intent
discriminatory
intent
means
actual
motive
legal
presumption
drawn
factual
showing
something
less
actual
motive
thus
appeals
may
reverse
district
finding
discriminatory
intent
concludes
finding
clearly
erroneous
rule
insofar
fifth
circuit
assumed
otherwise
erred
iv
respondents
directly
defend
fifth
circuit
rule
trial
finding
discriminatory
intent
subject
standard
rule
rather
among
things
submit
appeals
recognized
appropriate
properly
applied
rule
setting
aside
findings
district
position
force
two
reasons
persuasive
first
although
appeals
acknowledged
correctly
stated
controlling
standard
rule
acknowledgment
came
late
opinion
expressly
referred
applied
rule
course
disagreeing
district
resolution
factual
issues
deemed
relevant
james
stockham
valves
fittings
furthermore
paragraph
finally
concludes
usw
seniority
system
unprotected
strongly
suggests
outcome
product
independent
consideration
totality
circumstances
found
record
second
fundamentally
stated
convinced
mistake
made
identified
mistake
also
source
mistake
mistake
district
record
doubt
existence
discriminatory
purpose
source
mistake
district
failure
recognize
relevance
racial
purposes
iam
district
given
role
creation
establishment
seniority
system
due
consideration
might
reached
different
conclusion
supra
appellate
discerns
district
failed
make
finding
erroneous
view
law
usual
rule
remand
proceedings
permit
trial
make
missing
findings
actfinding
basic
responsibility
district
courts
rather
appellate
courts
appeals
resolved
first
instance
factual
dispute
considered
district
demarco
proceeding
manner
seems
us
incredible
unless
appeals
construed
circuit
rule
respect
authority
arrive
independent
findings
ultimate
facts
free
strictures
rule
also
permit
examine
record
make
independent
findings
respect
issues
district
findings
set
aside
error
law
previously
said
however
premise
conclusion
infirm
whether
ultimate
fact
discriminatory
intent
factual
matter
subject
standard
rule
follows
district
finding
ultimate
fact
set
aside
error
law
appeals
relieved
usual
requirement
remanding
proceedings
tribunal
charged
task
factfinding
first
instance
accordingly
judgment
appeals
reversed
cases
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
procedural
history
cases
rather
complex
original
complaint
filed
since
time
case
tried
three
times
twice
reviewed
appeals
prior
unionization
bessemer
plant
divided
departments
departments
usw
units
international
association
machinists
aerospace
workers
iam
units
departments
remained
essentially
unchanged
international
brotherhood
electrical
workers
ibew
gained
representation
status
two
small
departments
ibew
unit
white
ibew
however
decertified
members
reabsorbed
department
represented
usw
departmental
seniority
system
part
initial
agreement
company
usw
however
seniority
system
changed
one
based
departments
one
based
upon
particular
occupations
within
departments
system
went
back
departmental
base
exceptions
see
infra
employees
transferring
request
company
electing
transfer
lieu
layoff
company
entered
agreement
department
labor
bring
employment
practices
compliance
executive
order
cfr
provided
exception
departmental
limit
seniority
allowing
certain
black
employees
make
interdepartmental
transfers
without
loss
seniority
fifth
circuit
relied
upon
following
passage
teamsters
seniority
system
litigation
entirely
bona
fide
applies
equally
races
ethnic
groups
extent
locks
employees
jobs
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
specifically
declined
make
finding
whether
provision
seniority
system
greater
relative
effect
blacks
whites
qualitative
differences
departments
concentrated
believed
inquiry
inconsistent
earlier
fifth
circuit
opinion
case
particular
focused
history
unionization
process
plant
found
certain
departmental
divisions
based
evolving
relationship
usw
iam
respect
usw
district
found
nion
meetings
conducted
different
sides
hall
white
black
members
social
functions
union
also
segregated
app
also
found
however
hile
possessing
trappings
taken
otherwise
segregated
society
usw
local
one
institutions
area
function
fact
foster
maintain
segregation
rather
served
joint
interest
white
black
workers
higher
priority
racial
considerations
appear
us
district
actually
found
qualitative
difference
held
irrelevant
relevant
passage
district
opinion
read
follows
ranking
usw
iam
departments
according
perceived
order
desirability
one
attempt
measure
relative
effect
rule
white
black
employees
may
well
somewhat
greater
impact
felt
blacks
whites
although
conclusion
means
certain
original
complaint
case
mention
iam
prior
first
trial
respondents
sought
received
leave
amend
complaint
add
iam
rule
defendant
insofar
relief
requested
may
involve
infringe
upon
provisions
union
collective
bargaining
agreement
company
order
district
june
app
gypsum
characterized
standard
follows
finding
clearly
erroneous
although
evidence
support
reviewing
entire
evidence
left
definite
firm
conviction
mistake
committed
note
appeals
quoted
passage
conclusion
analysis
district
opinion
supra
see
jackson
city
killeen
payne
mclemore
wholesale
retail
stores
wilkins
university
houston
lindsey
mississippi
research
development
center
rohde
steel
castings
joshi
florida
state
university
phillips
joint
legislative
committee
danner
civil
service
thompson
leland
police
crawford
western
electric
burdine
texas
dept
community
affairs
williams
tallahassee
motors
parson
kaiser
aluminum
chemical
causey
ford
motor
east
romine
indication
opinions
appeals
fifth
circuit
see
supra
circuit
rule
respect
ultimate
facts
another
way
stating
standard
review
respect
mixed
questions
law
fact
ultimate
fact
statutory
legally
determinative
consideration
intentional
discrimination
satisfied
subsidiary
facts
admitted
found
trier
fact
indicated
text
however
question
intentional
discrimination
pure
question
fact
furthermore
appeals
opinion
case
appears
address
issue
question
fact
unmixed
legal
considerations
time
occasion
indicated
findings
ultimate
facts
independently
reviewable
baumgartner
issue
whether
findings
two
lower
courts
satisfied
standard
proof
necessary
sustain
denaturalization
decree
held
conclusion
two
lower
courts
exacting
standard
proof
satisfied
unreviewable
finding
fact
one
reviewing
independently
assess
referred
finding
one
ultimate
fact
case
involved
appraisal
strength
entire
body
evidence
said
significance
proof
standard
lost
ascertainment
lower
courts
whether
exacting
standard
proof
satisfied
whole
record
deemed
fact
order
facts
open
review
fifth
circuit
rule
appellate
consideration
ultimate
facts
roots
discussion
baumgartner
galena
oaks
scofield
question
whether
gain
derived
sale
number
houses
treated
capital
gain
ordinary
income
appeals
relied
directly
baumgartner
holding
issue
ultimate
fact
appellate
may
review
free
rule
causey
ford
motor
supra
relying
galena
oaks
scofield
supra
said
although
discrimination
vel
non
essentially
question
fact
time
ultimate
issue
resolution
case
deemed
independently
reviewable
passage
east
romine
supra
repeated
cases
us
supra
rested
opinion
causey
ford
motor
whatever
baumgartner
may
meant
discussion
ultimate
facts
surely
mean
whenever
result
case
turns
factual
findings
appellate
need
remain
within
constraints
rule
baumgartner
discussion
ultimate
facts
referred
pure
findings
fact
find
discriminatory
intent
context
findings
clearly
impl
application
standards
law
noted
appeals
certain
points
purport
correct
viewed
legal
errors
part
district
presence
legal
errors
may
justify
remand
appeals
district
additional
factfinding
correct
legal
standard
infra
see
furnco
construction
waters
proof
employer
work
force
racially
balanced
contained
disproportionately
high
percentage
minority
employees
wholly
irrelevant
issue
intent
issue
yet
decided
need
therefore
address
issue
applicability
rule
standard
mixed
questions
law
fact
questions
historical
facts
admitted
established
rule
law
undisputed
issue
whether
facts
satisfy
statutory
standard
put
another
way
whether
rule
law
applied
established
facts
violated
substantial
authority
circuits
sides
question
compare
ex
rel
johnson
johnson
stafos
jarvis
johnson
salisbury
rogers
bates
pennsylvania
casualty
mccoy
also
support
decisions
proposition
conclusions
mixed
questions
law
fact
independently
reviewable
appellate
bogardus
commissioner
helvering
oil
helvering
rankin
commissioner
duberstein
commissioner
heininger
neither
dissent
contend
rule
inapplicable
findings
discriminatory
intent
rather
contends
rule
properly
applied
appeals
particular
regard
second
james
factor
whether
departmental
structure
rational
line
industry
practice
appeals
focus
evidentiary
basis
particular
finding
district
appeared
make
independent
examination
record
arrive
conclusion
contrary
district
likewise
dealing
genesis
seniority
system
whether
negotiation
maintenance
system
tainted
racial
discrimination
appeals
identifying
thought
legal
error
failing
consider
racial
practices
intentions
iam
otherwise
overturn
district
findings
clearly
erroneous
see
moore
lucas
moore
federal
practice
trial
fails
make
findings
find
material
issue
appeal
taken
appellate
normally
vacate
judgment
remand
action
appropriate
findings
made
rule
international
assn
bridge
workers
chicano
police
officer
assn
stover
gresham
burch
international
assn
machinists
aerospace
workers
general
electric
credit
robbins
iam
discriminatory
motivation
existed
imputed
usw
relevant
extent
may
shed
light
purpose
usw
company
creating
maintaining
separate
seniority
system
issue
cases
discriminatory
intent
part
iam
therefore
control
outcome
cases
neither
fact
true
usw
acquiesced
racially
discriminatory
conduct
part
iam
acquiescence
equivalent
discriminatory
purpose
part
usw
justice
stevens
concurring
part
except
extent
preliminary
comments
burden
sustaining
challenge
seniority
system
title
vii
ante
inconsistent
views
expressed
separately
american
tobacco
patterson
ante
join
opinion
justice
marshall
justice
blackmun
joins
except
part
dissenting
group
negro
employees
bessemer
plant
brought
class
action
steelworkers
america
local
usw
international
association
machinists
local
iam
plaintiffs
alleged
inter
alia
departmental
seniority
system
negotiated
unions
discriminated
negroes
violation
title
vii
civil
rights
act
et
seq
ed
supp
iv
civil
rights
act
district
northern
district
alabama
concluded
seniority
system
operate
discriminate
negroes
unanimous
panel
fifth
circuit
reversed
ruled
district
committed
several
errors
law
including
failure
give
proper
weight
role
iam
relied
patently
inaccurate
factual
conclusions
swint
remand
district
ruled
seniority
system
immune
attack
title
vii
time
finding
respondents
failed
show
discriminatory
intent
required
decision
teamsters
ante
fifth
circuit
unanimously
rejected
conclusion
district
majority
reverses
fifth
circuit
second
unanimous
decision
ground
appeals
pay
sufficient
homage
clearly
erroneous
rule
fed
rule
civ
proc
concluding
seniority
system
product
intentional
discrimination
negroes
agree
premise
majority
decision
remand
cases
yet
another
trial
application
premise
facts
case
respectfully
dissent
majority
premises
holding
assumption
absent
discriminatory
purpose
operation
seniority
system
unlawful
employment
practice
even
system
discriminatory
consequences
ante
quoting
trans
world
airlines
hardison
previously
indicated
find
anything
relevant
statutory
language
legislative
history
support
proposition
title
vii
immunizes
seniority
system
perpetuates
past
discrimination
system
issue
clearly
simply
plaintiffs
unable
demonstrate
satisfaction
system
adopted
maintained
invidious
purpose
see
teamsters
supra
opinion
marshall
opinion
placing
burden
plaintiffs
challenge
seniority
systems
admitted
discriminatory
impact
burden
never
imposed
civil
suits
brought
title
vii
frustrates
clearly
expressed
congress
effectively
freeze
entire
generation
negro
employees
discriminatory
patterns
existed
act
quarles
philip
morris
supp
ed
butzner
ii
even
accept
decision
impose
novel
burden
title
vii
plaintiffs
still
unable
concur
conclusion
fifth
circuit
decision
reversed
failing
abide
rule
majority
asserts
appeals
action
ignored
rule
made
independent
determination
discriminatory
purpose
disagree
view
followed
legal
principles
rejecting
district
finding
discriminatory
purpose
concluding
finding
purpose
compelled
relevant
evidence
majority
concedes
must
appeals
acknowledged
correctly
stated
controlling
standard
rule
ante
opinion
appeals
plainly
findings
fact
may
overturned
either
clearly
erroneous
made
erroneous
view
controlling
legal
principles
furthermore
majority
notes
ante
appeals
justified
decision
reject
district
finding
seniority
system
result
purposeful
discrimination
stating
analysis
totality
facts
circumstances
surrounding
creation
continuance
departmental
system
leaves
us
definite
firm
conviction
mistake
made
emphasis
added
omitted
frankly
loss
understand
appeals
expressed
conclusion
district
finding
issue
intent
clearly
erroneous
precision
clarity
majority
rejects
appeals
clear
articulation
implementation
rule
apparent
ground
course
correctly
setting
forth
requirements
rule
also
included
following
quotation
prior
decision
east
romine
although
discrimination
vel
non
essentially
question
fact
time
ultimate
issue
resolution
case
expressly
proscribed
finding
discrimination
nondiscrimination
finding
ultimate
fact
cites
omitted
reviewing
district
findings
therefore
proceed
make
independent
determination
appellant
allegations
discrimination
though
bound
findings
subsidiary
fact
clearly
erroneous
neither
arguments
justifies
majority
conclusion
cases
must
remanded
fourth
trial
merits
aware
rule
decision
embraced
places
dispositive
weight
whether
accurate
statement
controlling
principle
appears
early
late
opinion
majority
suggest
basis
unique
rule
interpretation
long
acknowledges
proper
legal
standard
think
irrelevant
whether
chooses
set
forth
standard
beginning
end
opinion
heart
majority
argument
therefore
failure
remand
action
district
rejecting
conclusion
seniority
system
bona
fide
within
meaning
indicates
appeals
properly
follow
rule
addressing
issue
however
necessary
examine
nature
finding
intent
required
teamsters
procedure
courts
appeals
follow
reviewing
district
finding
intent
extent
adhered
procedure
case
district
examined
four
factors
approved
fifth
circuit
james
stockham
valves
fittings
cert
denied
determine
whether
departmental
seniority
system
adopted
maintained
discriminatory
purpose
although
indicating
four
factors
way
demonstrate
existence
discriminatory
intent
today
implicitly
acknowledges
proof
factors
satisfies
requirements
teamsters
particular
majority
agrees
finding
discriminatory
intent
sufficient
satisfy
teamsters
based
circumstantial
evidence
including
evidence
discriminatory
impact
see
ante
see
also
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
dev
given
nature
factual
inquiry
appeals
must
first
determine
whether
district
applied
correct
legal
principles
therefore
considered
legally
relevant
evidence
presented
parties
majority
acknowledges
legal
function
appeals
must
perform
first
instance
ante
second
appeals
must
determine
whether
district
finding
respect
intent
supported
legally
relevant
evidence
holds
today
generally
factual
determination
limited
dictates
rule
finally
appeals
sets
aside
district
finding
respect
intent
either
finding
clearly
erroneous
based
erroneous
legal
standard
may
determine
interest
judicial
economy
whether
legally
relevant
evidence
presented
district
permits
one
resolution
factual
issue
ante
one
conclusion
possible
reviewing
free
find
existence
fact
question
matter
law
see
bigelow
virginia
levin
mississippi
river
fuel
reading
opinion
demonstrates
appeals
followed
precisely
course
examining
issue
discriminatory
intent
even
majority
concedes
appeals
determined
district
committed
legal
error
failing
consider
relevant
evidence
resolving
first
third
james
factors
ante
respect
first
james
factor
whether
system
inhibits
employees
equally
transferring
seniority
units
district
found
departmental
system
locked
negro
white
workers
departments
discouraging
transfers
district
acknowledged
negroes
might
suffer
greater
impact
company
previous
discriminatory
policy
openly
maintaining
negro
jobs
white
jobs
caused
negroes
concentrated
less
desirable
positions
district
concluded
however
differential
impact
irrelevant
determining
whether
seniority
system
operated
neutrally
appeals
properly
held
district
erred
failing
consider
fact
departmental
system
locked
negroes
less
desirable
jobs
similarly
third
james
factor
whether
seniority
system
genesis
racial
discrimination
district
rejected
respondents
argument
motives
iam
relevant
concluded
usw
charged
racial
bias
iam
appeals
held
conclusion
erroneous
motives
intent
significant
consideration
whether
seniority
system
genesis
racial
discrimination
majority
acknowledges
findings
fact
made
erroneous
view
controlling
legal
principles
clearly
erroneous
rule
apply
findings
may
stand
ante
quoting
see
also
kelley
southern
pacific
general
motors
singer
manufacturing
parke
davis
rowe
general
motors
found
district
findings
first
third
james
factors
made
erroneous
view
controlling
legal
principles
appeals
compelled
set
aside
findings
free
requirements
rule
two
findings
set
aside
district
conclusion
departmental
system
bona
fide
within
meaning
also
rejected
since
conclusion
based
least
part
erroneous
determinations
concerning
first
third
james
factors
least
therefore
appeals
entitled
remand
action
district
purpose
reexamining
bona
fides
seniority
system
proper
legal
standards
however
often
noted
cases
remand
inappropriate
facts
record
susceptible
one
reasonable
interpretation
see
dayton
board
education
brinkman
bigelow
virginia
supra
cases
ffective
judicial
administration
requires
appeals
draw
inescapable
factual
conclusion
rather
remand
case
district
needless
proceedings
levin
mississippi
river
fuel
action
particularly
appropriate
appeals
good
position
evaluate
record
evidence
district
major
premise
behind
deference
trial
courts
expressed
rule
findings
fact
depend
peculiarly
upon
credit
given
witnesses
see
hear
yellow
cab
see
also
oregon
state
medical
society
indeed
rule
expressly
acknowledges
importance
factor
stating
due
regard
shall
given
opportunity
trial
judge
credibility
witnesses
consequently
especially
reluctant
resolve
factual
issues
depend
credibility
witnesses
see
generally
oregon
state
medical
society
supra
cases
today
usual
deference
required
district
findings
fact
entirely
based
documentary
evidence
noted
general
motors
supra
trial
customary
opportunity
evaluate
demeanor
thus
credibility
witnesses
rationale
behind
rule
plays
restricted
role
paper
case
see
also
jennings
general
medical
findings
trial
based
documentary
rather
oral
evidence
carry
weight
appellate
review
orvis
higgins
believe
appeals
correctly
determined
finding
discriminatory
intent
compelled
documentary
record
presented
district
respect
three
four
james
factors
appeals
found
overwhelming
evidence
discriminatory
intent
first
ruling
district
erred
acknowledging
legal
significance
fact
seniority
system
locked
negroes
least
remunerative
jobs
company
appeals
determined
disproportionate
impact
demonstrated
system
operat
discourage
employees
equally
transferring
seniority
units
quoting
james
stockham
valves
fittings
second
noting
credible
explanation
ha
advanced
sufficiently
justify
existence
two
separate
die
tool
departments
two
separate
maintenance
departments
condition
found
plant
creation
departments
time
unionization
subsequent
years
appeals
concluded
second
james
factor
satisfied
finally
respect
third
james
factor
appeals
found
role
iam
properly
recognized
crystal
clear
considerations
race
permeated
negotiation
adoption
seniority
system
subsequent
negotiations
thereafter
reviewing
relevant
record
evidence
presented
district
appeals
concluded
doubt
based
upon
record
case
existence
discriminatory
purpose
fail
see
appeals
erred
carrying
appellate
function
respectfully
dissent
majority
decision
prolong
respondents
quest
vindication
rights
requiring
yet
another
trial
majority
acknowledges
ante
stated
gypsum
finding
fact
clearly
erroneous
reviewing
entire
evidence
left
definite
firm
conviction
mistake
committed
emphasis
added
contrary
majority
suggestion
ante
find
nothing
fifth
circuit
decision
james
stockham
valves
fittings
imply
factors
constitute
relevant
criteria
determining
discriminatory
intent
conclusion
seem
compelled
since
majority
notes
james
factors
nothing
summary
criteria
examined
teamsters
majority
indicates
ante
discriminatory
motive
iam
relevant
extent
may
shed
light
purpose
usw
company
creating
maintaining
separate
seniority
system
issue
case
read
appeals
opinion
action
holding
anything
usw
participated
establishing
system
designed
purpose
perpetuating
past
discrimination
third
james
factor
satisfied
given
iam
party
litigation
participation
creation
seniority
system
hardly
deemed
irrelevant
therefore
irrelevant
appeals
specifically
hold
district
factual
findings
clearly
erroneous
two
witnesses
testified
brief
hearing
district
conducted
question
whether
seniority
system
immune
witnesses
longtime
negro
employees
testified
behalf
respondents
concerning
racial
segregation
plant
usw
indication
district
opinion
relied
upon
testimony
two
witnesses
concluding
system
bona
fide
within
meaning
remainder
record
district
consisted
entirely
exhibits
submitted
respondents
company
unions
concerning
development
maintenance
seniority
system
say
rule
apply
document
cases
see
singer
manufacturing
however
decision
rests
upon
incorrect
reading
undisputed
document
appellate
free
substitute
reading
document
eutectic
metco
see
also
mckensie
sea
land
service
best
medium
pub
national
insider
cert
denied
ex
rel
binion
cert
denied
although
majority
correct
stating
appeals
refer
expressly
apply
standard
reaching
conclusion
ante
emphasis
added
appellate
adherence
requirements
rule
nevertheless
apparent
following
statement
record
evidence
indicates
significant
number
departments
established
upon
unionization
next
twenty
five
years
departments
carved
previously
mixed
departments
establishment
maintenance
segregated
departments
appear
based
considerations
objective
separate
races
emphasis
added
whether
appeals
expressly
ruled
fourth
james
factor
irrelevant
appeals
clearly
stated
conclusion
based
totality
facts
circumstances
surrounding
creation
continuance
departmental
system
see
also
crystal
clear
considerations
race
permeated
negotiation
adoption
seniority
system
subsequent
negotiations
thereafter
consider
significant
decision
conditions
racial
discrimination
affected
negotiation
renegotiation
system
even
assuming
district
correct
concluding
system
maintained
free
illegal
purpose
appeals
entitled
conclude
discriminatory
intent
demonstrated
basis
relevant
evidence