Thus, an employer's decision to reject a job applicant based on racial or ethnic stereotypes about criminality - rather than qualifications and suitability for the position - is unlawful disparate treatment that violates Title VII.
Example 2: Disparate Treatment Based on National Origin.
In light of the evidence showing that Nelson's and Tad's educational backgrounds are similar, that Nelson's work experience is more extensive, and that Tad's criminal conduct is more indicative of untrustworthiness, MPII has failed to state a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for rejecting Nelson. practices that are fair in form, but discriminatory in operation. If an employment practice which operates to exclude [African Americans] cannot be shown to be related to job performance, the practice is prohibited." An unlawful employment practice based on disparate impact is established . More specifically, such information also includes which offenses or classes of offenses were reported to the employer (e.g., all felonies, all drug offenses); whether convictions (including sealed and/or expunged convictions), arrests, charges, or other criminal incidents were reported; how far back in time the reports reached (e.g., the last five, ten, or twenty years); and the jobs for which the criminal background screening was conducted.
If Nelson filed a Title VII charge alleging disparate treatment based on national origin and the EEOC's investigation confirmed these facts, the EEOC would find reasonable cause to believe that discrimination occurred. Training or guidance documents used by the employer also are relevant, because they may specify which types of criminal history information to gather for particular jobs, how to gather the data, and how to evaluate the information after it is obtained.
Nelson, in an interview with MPII, emphasizes his successful prior work experience, from which he has good references, but also discloses that, at age 16, he pled guilty to breaking and entering into his high school as part of a class prank that caused little damage to school property.
Neither Tad nor Nelson had subsequent contact with the criminal justice system. With respect to criminal records, there is Title VII disparate impact liability where the evidence shows that a covered employer's criminal record screening policy or practice disproportionately screens out a Title VII-protected group and the employer does not demonstrate that the policy or practice is job related for the positions in question and consistent with business necessity.
In an interview for a research job with Meaningful and Paid Internships, Inc.