Which test do you use to prove disparate impact?

In cases of proving disparate impact, the Griggs test is the appropriate measure. This test originates from the landmark Supreme Court case, Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), which established that employment practices that disproportionately affect a protected group, even in the absence of intent to discriminate, can be considered discriminatory.

The Griggs test emphasizes the importance of the outcomes of employment policies rather than the intent behind them. It focuses on whether a policy has a significantly adverse impact on a particular group compared to others. If the employer cannot demonstrate that the policy in question is job-related and consistent with business necessity, then the practice is considered discriminatory.

This framework is crucial in understanding and addressing systemic inequalities in the workplace, as it holds employers accountable for the consequences of their policies and practices, not just for the intentions behind them. Consequently, the Griggs test serves as a vital tool in civil rights litigation and employment law to combat subtle forms of discrimination that might otherwise go unnoticed.