Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority

Read the Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority Name Professor Course Date of submission What were the legal issues in this case? The legal issue in the case of Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority was racial discrimination about black applicants during the TVA’s interview, in which Dunlap alleged disparate impact and disparate treatment. David Dunlap who filed the lawsuit claimed that the hiring process used by TVA was racially biased against him and other black applicants. Dunlap argues that he had a 20 year work experience as a boilermaker and 15 of which he had experience as a foreman. More so, Dunlap also had an experience working with TVA and going through the TVA training program. Despite all these, his efforts to get employment with the TVA since 1970s bore no fruits. Dunlap argued that the selection process used by TVA was racially biased in so many ways against black applicants (FindLaw, 2012). For instance, the selection committee comprised five officials four of whom were white and the remaining one was black. Therefore, the selection committee to start with was not balanced, and this enhanced an avenue for racial discrimination. Another example that showed racial discrimination was the attendance record score. Whereas Dunlap had the same excellent attendance record as two of the white applicants, his score was 3.7 while those of the white applicants were 5.5 and 4.2. In addition, Dunlap received a score of 4 for a perfect safety record, but a white applicant who had a safety record of two accidents within a span of 11 years scored 6. Furthermore, Dunlap was not the only person who had issues with TVA’s employment process; another African American who was taken during the selection process confessed that he had also been rejected for jobs at TVA despite his 30 years experience as a boilermaker. Dunlap also argued that he was more qualified than some of the applicants who were hired because of his technical and supervisory experience. Therefore, he concluded that right from the beginning, the interview process was racially biased because they selected people with fewer qualifications, and some with family affiliations with the officers. Therefore, “ The district court found that Dunlap had been subjected to discrimination under both disparate treatment and disparate impact analyses, concluding that the TVA’s subjective hiring processes permitted racial bias against both Dunlap and other black job applicants (Walsh, 2010, p. 209).  2. Explain why the plaintiff’s disparate (adverse) impact claim fail? Desperate impact requires demonstration of proof that the employment practice or facility harshly affects one group than another. It also requires the plaintiff to demonstrate that the process is not justified by business necessity. Though, according to the district court judgment TVA’s process of the interview was manipulated to elim...