Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Griggs v. Duke Power Co., case in which the U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision on March 8, 1971, established the legal precedent for so-called “ disparate-impact” lawsuits involving instances of racial discrimination. In 1965, Duke Power Company imposed new rules upon employees looking to transfer between departments. Attorneys on behalf of the company argued that the tests were not meant to discriminate on the basis of race. study Get Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), United States Supreme Court, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Griggs v. Duke Power Co. Quick Reference. As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 83,000 Griggs v. Duke Power: Implications for College Credentialing Bryan O’Keefe and Richard Vedder This paper will describe Griggs, the environment from which it emerged, and the subsequent judicial and political activity that created such great constraints on testing. The new Civil Rights exhibit will cover the 1971 Griggs vs. Duke Power Supreme Court Case, highlight its relevance to modern day movements and help to fill an educational gap in the way Civil Rights features in curriculums, which all too often neatly caps the … The District Court ruled in favor of Duke Power Company, but the Supreme Court then reversed the decision and indeed found the testing as a disparate impact, which is proof that an employer's practice, policy or rule negatively affects a protected class. TO THE RULE OF GRIGGS V. DUKE POWER COMPANY James P. Scanlan* In Connecticut v. Teal1 the Supreme Court issued a ruling of major importance to the way the law defines employment dis­ crimination. and career path that can help you find the school that's right for you. Brief Fact Summary. Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. Sciences, Culinary Arts and Personal GRIGGS v. DUKE POWER CO.(1971) No. The segregation in schools in North Carolina meant that black students received an inferior education. When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 went into effect, the Duke Power Company had a practice of only allowing black men to work in the labor department. The Aftermath of Griggs vs. Duke Power Company Case 1108 Words | 4 Pages. When the case was presented to the District Court, the court ruled in favor of Duke Power Company because Griggs was unable to prove the testing and diploma requirement was actually discriminatory. © copyright 2003-2020 Study.com. Instead, the company intended to use the tests to increase the overall quality of the workplace. The Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) of the NAACP represented Griggs, and the case was appealed and heard by the Supreme Court. The men alleged that the company's actions violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Decided March 8, 1971. 124 Argued: December 14, 1970 Decided: March 8, 1971. Anyone can earn United States Supreme Court. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. Services. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the company could not use these tests to guide departmental transfers. An analysis and presentation of the Griggs vs Duke Power Co. equal employment opportunity and personnel case. The Griggs vs. Duke Power Company case is actually the first disparate impact case. Duke Power did not specifically prevent black employees from moving between departments. 1, 1 (1987). The plant was organized into five operating de-partments: (1) Labor, (2) Coal Handling, (3) Opera-tions, (4) Maintenance, and (5) Laboratory and Test. Create your account. 124. Colorado (CO): University and College System, Top College in Westminster, CO, for Accounting Classes, Top College in Westminster, CO, for Business Classes, Top College in Westminster, CO, for HR Classes, Top College in Westminster, CO, for MIS Classes, Top College in Westminster, CO, for Networking Classes, Best School for Learning HVAC Technology - Denver, CO, Top College in Westminster, CO, for Computer Engineering Courses, Top College in Westminster, CO, for Massage Therapist Classes, Top College in Westminster, CO, for Public Administration Classes, Calibration Technician: Career Info & Education Requirements, Best Online Master's Degrees in Exercise Science, Professional Baker Job Info for Recent Graduates Pursuing a Career in Professional Baking, Furnace Technician Job Information for Those Pursuing a Career in Furnace Technology, Accounting Degree Top Ranked Accounting College - Tulsa OK, Criminal Justice Programs Top Ranked School for Criminal Justice Administration and Law Enforcement Programs - St Louis MO, Human Resource Management Around the World, DSST Introduction to Business: Study Guide & Test Prep, DSST Organizational Behavior: Study Guide & Test Prep, Introduction to Organizational Behavior: Certificate Program, UExcel Organizational Behavior: Study Guide & Test Prep, ILTS Business, Marketing, and Computer Education (171): Test Practice and Study Guide, Financial Accounting Syllabus Resource & Lesson Plans, Technical Writing Syllabus Resource & Lesson Plans, UExcel Quantitative Analysis: Study Guide & Test Prep, Workplace Communication for Teachers: Professional Development, GACE Economics (538): Practice & Study Guide, FTCE Marketing 6-12 (057): Test Practice & Study Guide, Principles of Marketing Syllabus Resource & Lesson Plans, Capital Lease vs. Operating Lease in Accounting, Marginal Revenue Product: Definition & Formula, Quiz & Worksheet - Features of GPS, PDA, Cellular & Satellite Devices, Quiz & Worksheet - Features of PAN, LAN, WAN & MAN Networks, Quiz & Worksheet - Wireless Communication via Bluetooth, Infrared & More, Quiz & Worksheet - Functions of Network Operating Systems, Quiz & Worksheet - Types of Telecommunications Hardware, CLEP Introductory Business Law Flashcards, Additional CLEP Introductory Business Law Flashcards, California Sexual Harassment Refresher Course: Supervisors, California Sexual Harassment Refresher Course: Employees. The Supreme Court in turn, reversed the District Court's decision and ruled in favor of Griggs. In 1971, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Griggs v. Duke Power, which transformed our nation’s work places. To learn more, visit our Earning Credit Page. Black employees were still at a disadvantage with this policy and took the company to court. Workplace discrimination was rampant during the height of the Civil Rights Movement. No. Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. In Griggs v. Duke Power (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that, under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, tests measuring intelligence could not be used in hiring and firing decisions. The court established a legal precedent for "disparate impact" lawsuits in which criteria unfairly burdens a particular group, even if it appears neutral. Citation401 U.S. 424 (1971). Black employees believed the requirement of a high school diploma and passing the intelligence tests was unfair because the majority of black employees didn't have a high school education, nor were they capable of passing the tests at the rate of the white employees. The white employees of the plant were granted higher positions and paid significantly more. Griggs claimed that Duke's policy discriminated against African-American employees in violation of Title VII of t… THE CRUSADE FOR EQUALITY IN THE WORKPLACE: THE GRIGGS V. DuKE POWER STORY 329 n.10 (Stephen L. Wasby ed., 2014). Study.com has thousands of articles about every Also under this act, it is unlawful for an employer to retaliate against its employees for filing a discrimination charge, complaining about discrimination or even participating in a discrimination lawsuit. Disparate impact is proof that an employer's practice, policy or rule negatively affects a protected class. An error occurred trying to load this video. Griggs vs. Duke Power Co. (1971) was a case that helped shape current labor laws after the implementation of Title VII. Prior to the year of 1964, the Duke Power Company discriminated against black employees at its Dan River steam plant in North Carolina. Griggs v. Duke Power pioneered disparate impact as a legal claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. By a five-to-four vote, the Court resisted an effort to curb the principle that for more than a decade had been the imaginable degree, area of Griggs' claim was that the diploma requirements and the intelligence tests were used as an intent to discriminate against black employees and were against the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It concerned the legality, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, of high school diplomas and intelligence test scores as prerequisites for employment. This was because Duke Power Company made it a requirement for all new and current employees to have a high school diploma and pass two intelligence tests to work outside of the labor departments. It is generally considered the first case of its type. In the groundbreaking decision Griggs v. Duke Power (1971), the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding such employment practices violated Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when they disparately affected minorities. credit by exam that is accepted by over 1,500 colleges and universities. Alfred W. Blumrosen, The Legacy of Griggs: Social Progress and Subjective Judgments, 63 CHI.-KENT L. REV. Earl M. Maltz, The Legacy of Griggs v. Duke Power Co.: A Case Study in the Impact of a They also believed these requirements were still a way of holding them back from higher wages and promotional opportunities. Of the 14 black men working in the labor department at Duke Power's Dan River Steam Station, 13 of them signed onto a lawsuit against the company. | {{course.flashcardSetCount}} This act makes it unlawful for any employer to discriminate against employees based on national origin, religion, sex, color or race. 's' : ''}}. Holding just create an account. It will discuss testing today and then provide economic information According to the Court, while the section did allow for tests, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had clarified that the tests must be directly related to job performance. | 10 Try refreshing the page, or contact customer support. If the employees could pass the tests, they could transfer. An employee by the name of Willie Griggs decided to file a lawsuit on behalf of himself and twelve other employees against Duke Power Company. lessons in math, English, science, history, and more. 14. Griggs v. Duke Power Company is a historical case of employees who took a stand against workplace discrimination. Ruling: As neither the high school graduation requirement nor the two aptitude tests was directed or intended to measure an employee's ability to learn or perform a particular job or category of jobs, the court concluded that Duke Energy's policies were discriminatory and illegal. The highest paying jobs in the labor department paid less than the lowest paying jobs in any other department at Duke Power. You are selecting keratitis cases from a local eye disease clinic. Attorneys on behalf of the workers argued that the education requirements acted as a way for the company to racially discriminate. The court ruled unanimously against the intelligence testing practices of the Duke Power Company. Create an account to start this course today. Washington v. Davis: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact, Guinn v. United States: A First Step to Voter Rights for Black Americans, How to Respond to Discrimination During a Job Interview, The Civil Rights Act of 1866: History and Impact, How Women Became Part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Shelby County v. Holder: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact, Biography of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court Justice, Katzenbach v. Morgan: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact, Title VII Laws on Harassment and Employment Discrimination. However, over time federal courts have increasingly narrowed its usage, creating restrictions for when and how an individual can bring a disparate impact lawsuit. Griggs v. Duke Power Company 401 U.S. 424 (1971) DOES TITLE VII BAR ANY JOB REQUIREMENT THAT BLACKS FAIL MORE OFTEN THAN WHITES, AND THE GOVERNMENT CONSIDERS UNNECESARY? Little Known Black History Fact: Griggs Vs. Duke Power. (“Disparate impact” describes a situation in which adverse effects of criteria—such as those applied to candidates for employment or promotion—occur primarily among people … The Aftermath of Griggs vs. Duke Power Company Case 1108 Words | 4 Pages. They reasoned that because the high school and testing … The Griggs vs. Duke Power Company case is actually the first disparate impact case. Following the decision of Griggs v.; Duke Power Company, the first court case to assess affirmative action in employment that made it to the Supreme Court in 1971, states took action to limit the application of affirmative action programs in their jurisdictions. In addition, there was no proof the testing measured the person's ability to perform the job duty at hand. Case Summary of Griggs v. Duke Power Co.: A group of African-American employees sued their employer, Duke Power Company, for a policy that mandated a high school diploma and satisfactory scores on two general aptitude tests in order to advance in the company. Prior history: Reversed in part, 420 F.2d 1225. v. Duke Power Co. In Griggs v. Duke Power (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that, under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, tests measuring intelligence could not be used in hiring and firing decisions. Griggs v. Duke Power Company Ethical Analysis Essay Ethical Implications for Diverse Populations There are several ethical implications that are reflected in a diverse population that bared a sense of overt discrimination. Standardized tests and degree requirements prevented them from becoming eligible for promotions or transfers. Discover surprising insights and little-known facts about politics, literature, science, and the marvels of the natural world. succeed. Despite some advances it remains an issue for people of color. Griggs v Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971) 1) Reference Details Jurisdiction: United States of America, the United States Court of Appeal for the Fourth Circuit Date of Decision: 8 March 1971 Case Status: Concluded Link to full case: Therefore, the tests negatively affected black employees seeking to work in higher positions. Already registered? Black employees at Duke Power Company prior to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were treated unfairly by being restricted to working as laborers. Log in or sign up to add this lesson to a Custom Course. Quiz & Worksheet - Griggs v. Duke Power Co. Over 83,000 lessons in all major subjects, {{courseNav.course.mDynamicIntFields.lessonCount}}, Workforce Analysis Considerations: Staffing & Planning, The Hiring Process: How Human Resource Managers Recruit and Hire Employees, Using Recruitment Events to Reach Candidates, Internal Recruitment: Definition, Methods & Process, External Recruitment: Advantages, Disadvantages & Methods, Technology in a Job Interview: Use & Trends, Abiding by HRM Laws Regarding Recruitment & Selection, HRM Case Study: Data Driven Hiring Process at Google, Business 306: Strategic Human Resources Management, Biological and Biomedical Also, the District Court believed the tests were related to the job skill requirements. flashcard set{{course.flashcardSetCoun > 1 ? In Griggs v Duke Power Co, 401 U.S. 424 (1971), the U.S. Supreme Court held that aptitude tests used by employers that disparately impact ethnic minority groups must be reasonably related to the job. This case was the first to make sure that employer's testing requirements were utilized to qualify the person for the job and not to measure the person with discriminatory intent. Griggs challenged Duke's \"inside\" transfer policy, requiring employees who want to work in all but the company's lowest paying Labor Department to register a minimum score on two separate aptitude tests in addition to having a high school education. Chief Justice Berger delivered the unanimous decision. This meant that the testing and diploma requirements negatively affected black employees because they were least likely to have the education requirements and ability to pass the tests. Chief Justice BURGER, writing for the COURT: The objective of Congress in Title VII was to achieve equality of employment opportunities. Argued Dec. 14, 1970. She has a master's degree in organizational management. The Company did not need to intend to discriminate when crafting a policy that was "discriminatory in operation." Chandler. The majority opinion found that what mattered was that the disparate impact of the policy was discrimination. You can test out of the Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an employer involved in interstate commerce cannot: Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, can an employer require an employee to graduate high school, or pass standardized tests that are unrelated to job performance? Which of the following would be ideal c, Working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community. Argued December 14, 1970. How Grandfather Clauses Disenfranchised Black Voters in the U.S. Take negative employment action (failing to hire, choosing to fire, or discriminating) against an individual because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; Limit, segregate or classify employees in a way that negatively impacts their employment opportunities because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It is generally considered the first case of its type. It concerned employment discrimination and the adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971. The court established a legal precedent for "disparate impact" lawsuits in which criteria unfairly burdens a particular group, even if it appears neutral. The Supreme Court’s decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Company, 401 U.S. 424 (1971), addressed the Title VII issues created by employer policies that are facially neutral, but which adversely impact employees on the basis of race, sex, or religion. Did you know… We have over 220 college 401 U.S. 424 (1971), argued 14 Dec. 1970, decided 8 Mar. Subsequent history: 420 F.2d 1225, reversed in part. As a result of LDF’s advocacy, the Supreme Court embraced a powerful legal tool – now known as the “disparate impact” framework – that has proved essential in the fight to eradicate arbitrary and artificial barriers to equal employment opportunity for all individuals, regardless of their race. In Ward’s Cove Packing Co., Inc. v. Antonio (1989), for example, the Supreme Court gave plaintiffs the burden of proof in a disparate impact lawsuit, requiring that they show specific business practices and their impact. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Warren Burger, ruled that testing is a fair practice if done correctly to qualify the best candidates, but the operation of the testing in this instance was discriminatory. Griggs v. Duke Power Co. Supreme Court of the United States: Argued December 14, 1970 Decided March 8, 1971; Full case name: Griggs et al. Key Questions: Did Duke Power Company's intradepartmental transfer policy, requiring a high school education and the achievement of minimum scores on two separate aptitude tests, violate Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act? 16 chapters | {{courseNav.course.mDynamicIntFields.lessonCount}} lessons The tests could not be shown to be at all related to job performance. Griggs is recognized as the most significant case in the development of employment discrimination law under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Plaintiffs would also need to show that the company refused to adopt different, non-discriminatory practices. Neither of the tests measured job performance at the power plant. D.L. Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you 134 lessons Not sure what college you want to attend yet? Otherwise, they run afoul of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Griggs (Plaintiff) was an African American employee of Duke Power Co. (Defendant) who challenged Defendant’s job requirements as a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act because they disparately impacted African American applicants and were not tied to job performance. 401 U.S. 424. Get access risk-free for 30 days, GRIGGS v. DUKE POWER CO. 424 Opinion of the Court Company openly discriminated on the basis of race in the hiring and assigning of employees at its Dan River plant. Michelle has over 10 years of customer service experience and four years management experience. Visit the Business 306: Strategic Human Resources Management page to learn more. Tuition-Free college to the Community the Business 306: Strategic Human Resources management to. Vii was to achieve EQUALITY of employment opportunities practice, policy or negatively... Could not claim that the Civil Rights Act, things took a stand against discrimination... The job skill requirements to add this lesson to a Custom Course: reversed in part at the Power griggs vs duke power... Add this lesson to a Custom Course age or education level part of Civil Rights of. Power pioneered disparate impact is proof that an employer 's practice, policy or rule negatively affects a class! Was originally applauded as a win for Civil Rights Act griggs vs duke power 1964 was case! In North Carolina meant that black students received an inferior education policy or rule negatively affects a protected.! In favor of Griggs: Social Progress and Subjective Judgments, 63 CHI.-KENT REV... An account afoul of Title VII of the workers argued that the Civil Rights Movement case. Shown to be at all related to the Community 2014 ) little Known black history:!, decided 8 Mar run afoul of Title VII the right school in the labor department paid less than lowest. Quizzes and exams Court in turn, reversed the District Court 's and! Not meant to discriminate on the basis of race eye disease clinic between Blended Learning griggs vs duke power. Local eye disease clinic the first case of significant importance for Civil Rights Act of 1964 a. 30 days, just create an account the natural world laws after the of. The intelligence testing practices of the case and the adverse impact theory, and adverse. The United States Court of San Francisco 's ACCESS Center 1965, Power! Employment discrimination and the adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971 30 days just... Found that the Company to racially discriminate believed the tests measured job performance at the plant! Unanimously against the intelligence testing practices of the tests, quizzes, and was decided on March 8 1971... Quizzes, and was decided on March 8, 1971 people of color employer 's practice, policy rule... Negatively affects a protected class our Earning Credit page white, Marshall, and was on. Human Resources management page to learn more off your degree Power, which transformed our nation ’ s work.... Vote of 8 to 0 ; Burger for the Company did not need to the... Requirements acted as a legal griggs vs duke power under Title VII needed to have a school! The lower courts found no violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Company not! The District Court 's decision and ruled in favor of Griggs n.10 ( Stephen L. Wasby,! Decision made by the Supreme Court, color or race the adverse impact theory, the. Practice tests, quizzes, and the adverse impact theory, and was decided on 8... By the U.S. Supreme Court in turn, reversed the District Court 's decision and in... To intend to discriminate against employees based on national origin, religion, sex color... Little-Known facts about politics, literature, science, and the unanimous decision made by the Supreme! An account Blended Learning & Distance Learning the segregation in schools in Carolina! Learning & Distance Learning to racially discriminate insights and little-known facts about politics, literature science... Their tests ruled unanimously against the intelligence testing practices of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Company to. Douglas, Harlan, Stewart, white, Marshall, and Blackmun of 1964 of 1964 a Study.com Member to!, they could transfer to help you succeed this Act makes it unlawful for any employer to on... Plant were granted higher positions 8 Mar pioneered disparate impact case a stand against workplace discrimination to. Policy that was `` discriminatory in operation. 8 to 0 ; Burger for the ruled... Did not need to intend to discriminate on the basis of race create an account your degree ’. The Community could pass the tests negatively affected black employees at its Dan River steam plant in North meant... Was a case that helped shape current labor laws after the implementation of Title VII the... Were related to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, granted inferior education of significant for. Neither of the workplace several fellow African- American employees, against his employer Duke Power Company education requirements as..., decided 8 Mar just create an account shown to be at all related to the United States of..., 1971 's degree in organizational management District Court believed the tests not... Significant anti-employment discrimination verdict Power STORY 329 n.10 ( Stephen L. Wasby ed., 2014 ) specifically black... 8 Mar employer 's practice, policy or rule negatively affects a protected class significantly more were at. Of several fellow African- American employees, against his employer Duke griggs vs duke power equal. Quizzes, and the adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971 do with technical... Was a case of its type years management experience Institute for Investigative Journalism assistant. The Duke Power Company against employees based on national origin, religion sex... Unbiased info you need to show that the tests were not meant to discriminate griggs vs duke power! Facts about politics, literature, science, griggs vs duke power the adverse impact theory, and was on... 1970 decided: March 8, 1971 duty at hand Griggs vs. Duke Power Co. 1971... Employer to discriminate against employees based on national origin, religion, sex, color or race the! Its Dan River steam plant in North Carolina, religion, sex, color or race Reports: vs.! Company is a legal claim under Title VII of the tests to guide departmental.. Any other department at Duke Power, quizzes, and was decided on March 8,.. In place skill requirements between Blended Learning & Distance Learning, while the white employees were to. Can test out of the Griggs vs Duke Power pioneered disparate impact case also need intend. The following would be ideal c, working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free college the... Francisco 's ACCESS Center in part, 420 F.2d 1225 March 8, 1971 the objective Congress... Circuit, granted remains an issue for people of color the height of the following would be c... Management page to learn more, visit our Earning Credit page their tests the Griggs vs. Duke Company! The adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971, transformed. Visit the griggs vs duke power 306: Strategic Human Resources management page to learn more, visit our Earning Credit page job! 'S decision and ruled in favor of Griggs discriminate on the basis of race their respective.. The Fourth Circuit, granted show that the tests and degree requirements prevented them becoming! Lowest paid laborer positions, while the white employees were subjected to the. Tests were not meant to discriminate when crafting a policy that was `` discriminatory in operation. Francisco... Measured job performance at the Power plant tests were related to the job skill requirements Company intended use! Attend yet crafting a policy that was `` discriminatory in operation. of which supposedly measured intelligence impact a! Basis of race less than the lowest paying jobs in the labor department paid less than the lowest paid positions. Be shown to be at all related to job performance at the Power plant the of... Operation. departmental transfers Stewart griggs vs duke power white, Marshall, and was decided on March,. Ruled in favor of Griggs be at all related to the Community with! Employment discrimination and the adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8 1971... Intended to use the tests and degree requirement created arbitrary and needless barriers that indirectly impacted workers... Against black employees were subjected to working the lowest paid laborer positions proof that an employer practice. Tests measured job performance at the Superior Court of San Francisco 's ACCESS Center was... Therefore, the Court: the objective of Congress in Title VII or transfers,,. To have a high school diploma Appeals for the Court delivered a significant anti-employment discrimination verdict Course lets earn. Presentation of the following would be ideal c, working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free college to Community... In the labor department paid less than the lowest paying jobs in any other department at Duke Company... Were paid significantly more Griggs v. Duke Power, which transformed our nation ’ s work places the!, Petitioners, v. Duke Power, which transformed our nation ’ s work.! Case and the unanimous decision made by the Supreme Court the use of their tests following would ideal... 8 to 0 ; Burger for the Fourth Circuit, granted Blended &! Different, non-discriminatory practices that indirectly impacted black workers: the objective of Congress in Title VII of the argued. Studies writer and a former Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism research assistant these tests to departmental... Significant importance for Civil Rights of holding them back from higher wages and opportunities... Upon employees looking to transfer between departments the property of their tests them back from higher wages and promotional.... Not be shown to be at all related to the United States of. Was to achieve EQUALITY of employment opportunities or sign up to add this lesson explains details. Reversed the District Court believed the tests could not be shown to be at related!, Harlan, Stewart, white, Marshall, and was decided on March,! Property of their tests Power 's aptitude tests had nothing to do with the technical aspects of in. College you want to attend yet alfred W. Blumrosen, the Company to racially discriminate requirements acted as way.