What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
administration affirmative action agencies American apply Boston charges Civil Rights colleges Commission Committee compliance concern continue contract contractor court decision Department desegregation determine developed discrimination districts effect efforts employer employment enforcement equal established existing facilities fact Fall Federal female force funds higher education hiring housing increase Indian individual industry institutions issue Justice labor letter listings live majority male ment minority months OFCC officers operation opportunities past percent perform persons political position practices present prison problem procedures programs question race racial reason received responsible result segregation selection sharing social Spring staff Summer tion Title VII unions United Voting Winter women workers
Page 31 - The Act proscribes not only overt discrimination but also practices that are fair in form, but discriminatory in operation. The touchstone is business necessity. If an employment practice which operates to exclude Negroes cannot be shown to be related to job performance, the practice is prohibited.
Page 31 - Appeals erred in examining the employer's intent; but good intent or absence of discriminatory intent does not redeem employment procedures or testing mechanisms that operate as "built-in headwinds" for minority groups and are unrelated to measuring job capability.
Page 24 - Director of the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare...
Page 5 - Congress did not intend by Title VII, however, to guarantee a job to every person regardless of qualifications. In short, the Act does not command that any person be hired simply because he was formerly the subject of discrimination, or because he is a member of a minority group. Discriminatory preference for any group, minority or majority, is precisely and only what Congress has proscribed.