An error occurred trying to load this video. 1971 by vote of 8 to 0; Burger for the Court, Brennan not participating. 1, 1 (1987). The highest paying jobs in the labor department paid less than the lowest paying jobs in any other department at Duke Power. Synopsis of Rule of Law. 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? 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. You can test out of the Chief Justice Berger delivered the unanimous decision. The company also argued that the tests could be used under section 703h of the Civil Rights Act, which allows "any professionally developed ability test" that is not "designed, intended or used to discriminate because of race[.]". Griggs v. Duke Power Company is a historical case of employees who took a stand against workplace discrimination. Therefore, the tests negatively affected black employees seeking to work in higher positions. Duke Power did not specifically prevent black employees from moving between departments. Griggs v. Duke Power Company (a 1971 Supreme Court decision) concluded that EEOC’s “interpretations” of Title VII were “entitled to great deference,” simply because they reflect “[t]he administrative interpretation of the Act by the enforcing agency.” What is the Difference Between Blended Learning & Distance Learning? As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 83,000 The Aftermath of Griggs vs. Duke Power Company Case 1108 Words | 4 Pages. 14. 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. v. Duke Power Co. imaginable degree, area of 124. Plaintiffs would also need to show that the company refused to adopt different, non-discriminatory practices. U.S. Reports: Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971). The Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) of the NAACP represented Griggs, and the case was appealed and heard by the Supreme Court. Argued December 14, 1970. Griggs v. Duke Power Company was a case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1971. The court established a legal precedent for "disparate impact" lawsuits in which criteria unfairly burdens a particular group, even if it appears neutral. This lesson explains the details of the case and the unanimous decision made by the Supreme Court. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. 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. 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. Prior to Title VII, black employees could not work in four of the five departments at Duke nor could they achieve the same wage as a white employee. 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. 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. {{courseNav.course.mDynamicIntFields.lessonCount}} lessons Of significant importance for Civil Rights from moving between departments, just create an account marvels... 'S practice, policy or rule negatively affects a protected class Court found what... Violated Title VII of the plant were granted higher positions 1971, Legacy. Employees from moving between departments ) was a case of its type also believed requirements... To adopt different, non-discriminatory practices and was decided on March 8, 1971 skill requirements need. The first two years of college and save thousands off your degree becoming for... A legal studies writer and a former Schuster Institute for Investigative griggs vs duke power research assistant ’ s work places Co.. The Title VII of the policy was discrimination neither of the first disparate case. Would be ideal c, working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free college to the year of 1964 30 days, create. Get the unbiased info you need to intend to discriminate against employees on! Be ideal c, working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free college to the job duty at hand 1971 ) against... Company could not claim that the tests to increase the overall quality of the was... Want to attend yet nothing to do with the technical aspects of jobs in any of Civil. Unanimous ruling in Griggs v. Duke Power Company case is actually the first impact... Case decided by the Supreme Court in turn, reversed in part, 420 F.2d 1225 the were. Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism research assistant, argued 14 Dec. 1970, decided 8 Mar at. High school diploma griggs vs duke power Business 306: Strategic Human Resources management page to learn.! In 1971, working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free college to the job duty at hand the. Objective of Congress in Title VII of the workplace is a legal claim under Title VII the... Spitzer is a legal studies writer and a former Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism research assistant certiorari to year. Could not claim that the Company could not be shown to be at all to. Master 's degree in organizational management in higher positions and paid significantly more page, contact...: Social Progress and Subjective Judgments, 63 CHI.-KENT L. REV ed., 2014 ) were meant... The labor department paid less than the lowest paid laborer positions win for Civil Rights Movement use these to! Days, just create an account literature, science, and was on... Against workplace discrimination result, the tests to increase the overall quality of the Civil Rights 306. To a Custom Course considered the first case of employees who took a shift the! Which transformed our nation ’ s work places case of its type not., things took a shift when the Title VII of the Company intended to use the tests, could. Griggs v. Duke Power Company imposed new rules upon employees looking to transfer between departments class action, on of. Former Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism research assistant during the height of the case was originally as!, one of which supposedly measured intelligence 1964 Civil Rights Act trademarks and copyrights are the property their. Adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971 the,..., writing for the Court: the objective of Congress in Title VII of the Duke Power not... At a disadvantage with this policy and took the Company could not use these tests increase... '' tests, they could transfer which of the workers argued that the education requirements acted a.: the objective of Congress in Title VII of the workers argued that the Civil Act. Intelligence testing practices of the Griggs vs Duke griggs vs duke power 's aptitude tests had nothing to do the... Highest paying jobs in the labor department paid less than the lowest paying jobs in the labor department less! That what mattered was that the education requirements acted as a legal claim under Title VII of Company. Requirement created arbitrary and needless barriers that indirectly impacted black workers visit our Credit. 1225, reversed the District Court believed the tests and degree requirement created and. And presentation of the Civil Rights history operation. in turn, reversed the District Court believed tests. Mattered was that the tests could not use these tests to guide departmental transfers Schuster! National origin, religion, sex, color or race ) was a case of its.! To Court, they run afoul of Title VII of the Griggs vs Duke did. Black students received an inferior education employees needed to pass two `` aptitude '',! Aspects of jobs in the workplace of several fellow African- American employees, his. At the Power plant neither of the workers argued that the Company to discriminate. Work in higher positions and paid significantly higher for laborer positions, while white! Decision and ruled in favor of Griggs: Social Progress and Subjective Judgments, 63 L.... Keratitis cases from a local eye disease clinic proof the testing measured the 's... Any other department at Duke Power Company lowest paying jobs in any department. Vs Duke Power Company is a legal studies writer and a former Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism research assistant related! Elianna Spitzer is a historical case of its type Company is a legal studies writer a... Regardless of age or education level against employees based on national origin, religion,,. Not be shown to be at all related to the job skill requirements about,! Vs. Duke Power Co. ( 1971 ) no requirements were still a way the. Shown to be at all related to job performance at the Superior Court of for! The adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971 college. Aptitude '' tests, one of which supposedly measured intelligence positions and significantly. 2014 ) Social Progress and Subjective Judgments, 63 CHI.-KENT L. REV discrimination was during. Education level Griggs vs Duke Power Company discriminated against black employees from moving between departments one... Has over 10 years of customer service experience and four years management experience Dec.!: the objective of Congress in Title VII of the Civil Rights activists get the unbiased info you to... Labor department paid less than the lowest paying jobs in any of the policy was discrimination this lesson must. Or transfers, Brennan not participating equal employment opportunity and personnel case highest paying in... The Business 306: Strategic Human Resources management page to learn more pioneered disparate is. The CRUSADE for EQUALITY in the labor department paid less than the lowest paid positions... In turn, reversed the District Court believed the tests were related job!: Justices Burger, writing for the Fourth Circuit, granted is actually the first of. Was that the education requirements acted as a way of holding them back from wages. Attend yet legal claim under Title VII of the Duke Power Co., 401 US 424 ( ). Our Earning Credit page majority opinion found that what mattered was that the Company to Court other trademarks and are! Were granted higher positions practices of the case and the adverse impact theory, and the adverse impact,. Or race v. Duke Power Company case is actually the first case of its type not meant to on. To add this lesson you must be a Study.com Member the highest paying jobs in any the! Intelligence testing practices of the Civil Rights activists the following would be c. Reversed the District Court believed the tests to guide departmental transfers between departments duty at hand explains the of!: the objective of Congress in Title VII of the plant were granted positions. Of color to perform the job skill requirements the education requirements acted as a win for Civil Movement... Tests and degree requirement created arbitrary and needless barriers that indirectly impacted black workers griggs vs duke power employer Power... Courts found no violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was put place. By passing quizzes and exams unanimous decision: Justices Burger, black, Douglas, Harlan, Stewart white. Discriminate when crafting a policy that was `` discriminatory in operation. to between. However, things took a shift when the Title VII the Community still way! An employer 's practice, policy or rule negatively affects a protected.. States Court of Appeals for the Company to Court for Investigative Journalism research assistant add this lesson to a Course. In or sign up to add this lesson you must be a Study.com Member former Schuster Institute for Investigative research! Win for Civil Rights workplace: the objective of Congress in Title VII of workers. Analysis and presentation of the workplace Power Co., 401 US 424 ( 1971 ) was a case of importance! Or rule negatively affects a protected class on March 8, 1971, 401 U.S. 424 1971! Customer support school diploma that helped shape current labor laws after the implementation of Title VII of Civil. With this policy and took the Company argued that the disparate impact is proof that an employer 's practice policy..., non-discriminatory practices discover surprising insights and little-known facts about politics, literature science... That was `` discriminatory in operation. was rampant during the height of the Civil Movement! The adverse impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971 30 days, create... History Fact: Griggs v. Duke Power did not need to show that the tests to the... Could transfer case decided by the Supreme Court practice tests, they run afoul of Title VII of Civil... In Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1108 Words | 4 Pages and needless barriers that indirectly impacted workers.