Civil Rights Act (1964)
Title VII
By Brianna Huerta
1. Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964
2. Equal Employment
Opportunity
Table of Contents
3. Disparate
Treatment
4. Disparate Impact
5. Case Study:
Bostock v. Clayton
County
6. Conclusion
Civil Rights
Act (1964)
Title VII
Title VII is a federal law prohibiting employment discrimination
based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. It
applies to employers with 15 or more employees, including
federal, state, and local governments. The law is enforced by
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),
which oversees compliance and investigates complaints filed
by individuals who believe they have faced discrimination in
their workplaces.
The Equal
Employment
Opportunity

Disparate
Treatment
Disparate treatment occurs when an individual is treated
A principle ensuring that all individuals have
less favorably than others based on protected
equal access to employment opportunities
characteristics, such as race or gender. For instance, if
an employer consistently promotes male employees over
without discrimination. Fosters diversity and
equally qualified females, it indicates a preference based
inclusion in the workplace, promoting a fair
gender. This type of discrimination is often overt and
hiring process. Employers must ensure that job on
intentional, which can lead to serious consequences for
postings, recruitment, hiring, and promotion
the employer, including legal action, damage to
practices are free from bias. A female
reputation, and loss of talent. Organizations are
encouraged to establish fair and transparent hiring and
candidate with the same qualifications and
promotion practices to mitigate risks associated with
experience as a male candidate must have an
disparate treatment.
equal chance of being hired for the position.
Disparate Impact
Disparate impact refers to policies or practices that,
while neutral on the surface, disproportionately affect
a protected group. The focus is on the outcome rather
than the intent behind the policy. For example, if a
company implements a hiring test that is not directly
related to job performance and results in lower pass
rates for applicants from a specific racial group, it may
be considered disparate impact. Employers must
justify such practices by proving that they are
necessary for the job and that no less discriminatory
alternatives exist. Understanding disparate impact is
critical for maintaining compliance with Title VII.
Case Study:
Bostock v. Clayton
County
•
In the landmark case of Bostock v. Clayton County, the
Supreme Court ruled that Title VII protects employees from
discrimination based on sexual orientation. Gerald Bostock, a
gay man, was fired from his governmental job after disclosing
his sexuality, prompting a legal challenge. The court concluded
that discriminating against someone for being gay is inherently
a form of sex discrimination. This ruling has significant
implications for employment law, extending protections to
LGBTQ+ individuals in the workplace and marking a critical
development in the fight for equality.
Civil Rights Act (1964) Title VII
Thank You