Recruitment Drives Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Recruitment Drives - Research piece ExampleIn the case, an African American, David Dunlap applies for a job with the Tennessee Valley potentiality as a boilmaker. A selection committee facilitates the interview at the facilities premises. The interview consists of technical and non-technical questions. 70% of the marks are to distinguish for the interview process and the remainder, the applicants experience. Dunlap feels that the scores produced in the interview are discriminatory Dunlaps attendance record was similar to two white applicants records with 4.2 and 5.5, yet he receives a score of 3.7. The complainant is David Dunlap who had filed a suit at the District courtroom against the Tennessee Valley Authority, claiming that he was racially discriminated against, and in assault of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The courts ruled in favor of Dunlap, on the account that he was subjected to different treatment, impact and analysis. The District tourist court in its ruling statement pointed out that Tennessee Valley Authority TVA was subjective in its recruitment process and procedures and exacted out racial biasness against Dunlop and other applicants of African Americans descent. The defendant, TVA appealed against the ruling. The US chat up of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in this case was tasked with the need to determine whether Dunlop had fulfilled the burden of substantiation in the case, and if the District Court was right in its ruling. The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit upheld the District Courts ruling, on the account of sufficient evidence of unfair and discriminatory treatment. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals reversed the determination of desperate impact that the District Court had upheld. The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit upheld the District Courts ruling on awards of damages and fees (Patrick, 2003).As is clearly shown by Banner (2003), Dunlaps disparate impact claim failed because he fell short of provi ng that TVAs recruitment practices affected one contingent group more severely than another. Discriminatory proof is not required in this kind of situation. On the one hand, even though the District Court agreed and ruled to the effect that TVAs interviews and recruitment procedures were discriminatory against African Americans, the US Court of Appeal ruled that Dunlop did not adduce statistical proof to show that a group was being negatively impacted, needed for the establishment of a prima facie case.