Disparate Treatment

Sample Solution

Establishing a claim of disparate treatment in employment discrimination generally requires demonstrating four key situational factors, often referred to as the "prima facie" case under the McDonnell Douglas framework. This framework helps courts determine if there's enough initial evidence to suggest discrimination, shifting the burden to the employer to provide a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for their action.

Despite the plaintiff's qualifications, they suffered an adverse employment action.

• Why it's necessary: This factor confirms that the plaintiff experienced a concrete negative consequence in their employment. An "adverse employment action" is a significant change in employment status, such as termination, failure to hire, demotion, a significant change in benefits, or a denial of promotion. Without an adverse action, there's no harm to remedy and no basis for a lawsuit. Minor annoyances or disagreements typically do not rise to the level of an adverse employment action. This element shows that the alleged discrimination had a tangible impact on the plaintiff's employment.

The employer continued to seek applicants with the plaintiff's qualifications, or the position was filled by someone outside the plaintiff's protected class (or similarly situated individuals outside the protected class were treated more favorably).

• Why it's necessary: This is the crucial factor that creates an "inference of discrimination." It suggests that the adverse action taken against the plaintiff was not based on legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.
  • If the employer continued to seek applicants after rejecting a qualified plaintiff, it implies that the employer's stated reason for rejection (e.g., "no longer hiring for that role") might be a pretext.
  • If someone outside the plaintiff's protected class who was similarly or less qualified received the job or more favorable treatment, it strongly indicates that the plaintiff's protected characteristic played a role in the decision. This "comparative evidence" is key to showing disparate treatment – that the plaintiff was treated "disparately" (differently and less favorably) because of their protected status.

In essence, these four factors work together to establish a baseline suspicion of discrimination. They are not absolute proof, but they are sufficient to shift the burden of proof to the employer. Once the plaintiff establishes this prima facie case, the employer must then articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its action. If the employer does so, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to prove that the employer's stated reason is merely a pretext for discrimination.