Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Issues
The scenario revolves around whether or not the employer discriminated against the
African American employee on the basis of race.
Rule
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Analysis
Promotion decisions are critical in the workplace. Employers have to make a decision on
which employees to promote and the criteria that need to be used in the promotion exercise. In
this case study, one of the defenses that the employer can use is the BFOQ defense (Walsh,
2016). The BFOQ defense is available to employers who want occupants of certain jobs to have
certain protected class characteristics. The requirements are deemed to be facially
discriminatory. The defense is, however, narrow in nature and cannot be used in cases revolving
around racial discrimination. The implication is that this defense would fail in a court of law.
With regards to the African American employee, they can quote Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 to prove their case. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act makes it illegal for any
employer or individual to discriminate against another on the basis of color, race, religion, and
sex. Employees are also shielded against retaliation due to claims of discrimination that they
may have raised (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2021). In the present case,
the African American had a high score of 89 on certification. The employee had extensive
experience. The employee was subjected to an interviewing panel consisting of three whites. The

3
African American scored 48 in the interview with the interviewers stating that the score was
based on the fact that the interviewee failed to demonstrate how he would use his skills in the
job. A white who scored 34 points lower than the African American at the certification stage was
promoted instead. Evidently, this is a case of racial prejudice and racial discrimination. In EEOC
v. Jacksonville Association of Firefighters, Local 122, the defendant agreed to a $4.9 million
settlement in a race discrimination lawsuit. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
alleged that Jacksonville had put in place promotion policies that disadvantaged people of color
(U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2021). Similarly, in this case, the employer
would be found guilty of racial discrimination. The employer has put in place a policy for
promoting individuals based on the scores at the certification level and the interview level. The
African American outranked his peers at the certification level with a score of 89. At the
interview level, he still performed well, with a score of 48. Despite the high scores, the white
with the highest score at the interview level was promoted. The white that was promoted has not
performed well at the certification stage and had been outranked by the African American by a
margin of 34 points. The actions of the employer show a clear bias towards whites and, in so
doing, racially discriminate against African Americans in the organization.
Conclusion
The employer discriminated against the African Americans on the basis of race. This is
against Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The court would hold the employer culpable and would
thus take action against them. The employer should pay a fine as well as compensate the
employee for the discrimination. Policies need to be changed to ensure that there is more
diversity in the interviewing panel and ensure that the right candidates are promoted. The EEOC

4
may be required to carry out further investigations on the employer to evaluate policies put in
place.

5

References

Walsh, D. J. (2016). Employment law for human resource practice (5th ed.). Boston, MA:
Cengage Learning. 
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2021). Significant EEOC race/Color
Cases(Covering private and federal sectors). https://www.eeoc.gov/initiatives/e-
race/significant-eeoc-racecolor-casescovering-private-and-federal-sectors