The two basic approaches to establishing unlawful employment discrimination under Title Vii are disparate treatment and disparate impact. This module considered only the first of these. Disparate treatment is demonstrated when employees are treated differently because they are members of a protected class. Disparate treatment claims and legal suits have achieved a great deal of publicity over the last forty years. This publicity has helped to create some common myths about Title VII and protected classes in general.
Some of these myths are discussed in chapter 3. They include:
You must hire unqualified protected group members
You cannot discipline or discharge protected group members
You must give preferential treatment to protected group members
You must provide federal equal employment protection to people based on their sexual orientation
White males under forty are not protected by federal law
From the reading assignment it should be apparent that these charges do indeed constitute myths. Each is easily falsified based on the law and commonly accepted legal employment practices. At the same time these myths do strike a chord with some who feel employment regulations are too strict, inflexible or favor protected classes. Employers’ autonomy has been said to be curtailed and “majority rights” notions violated.
You may want to reflect on the many reasons why this is so. In the space of two to three pages address the following.
To what extent are these myths and myth promoters practicing stereotyping? What if jobs were plentiful – would that make a difference to some? Who gains and who loses when these myths are accepted as fact?