HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - THE CASE OF WATSON V. FT WORTH BANK AND TRUST

by

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - THE CASE OF WATSON V. FT WORTH BANK AND TRUST

Case Overview

Clara Watson; a black employee working at Fort Worth Bank & Trust applied four times for the position of supervisor in different facilities/ departments, but always lost the position to either white male or female, despite having experience. For the purpose of assessment pertaining to whether or not Clara Watson is a suitable candidate for the supervisory positions under consideration, the tools which were used were not subjected to validation process and system at any point in time. The tools primarily included interviews, rating scales and the assessment of the experiences. However, fourth rejection influenced Watson into filing against the Fort Worth Bank & Trust a claim under the section Title VII of the 1964 of the Civil Rights Act. Belonging to the Black ethnicity, Ms. Watson (plaintiff) brought up a charge against Fort Worth Bank & Trust (defendant); her employer, with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The claim filed stated of the discriminatory attitude adopted by her employer towards her in terms of her selection for the supervisory positions she applied for. Following the claim, Fort Worth Bank & Trust asserted in its defense the subjective property of the tools that were used for evaluation of candidates and subsequent selection of the candidate for the supervisory positions under consideration. In addition to that, the defendant goes on to emphasize that the assessment tools; interviewing instrument as well as the rating scales should not be challenged and hence subjected to validation techniques that is the prime facet of cases built on disparate impact. In the light of this, the defendant as proposed by the defendant itself; Fort Worth Bank & Trust should not be asked to justify its selection criteria as job-related. The District Court consented leading towards the dismissal of the case filed by the plaintiff; Clara Watson, under disparate impact theory laid down under the title VII. As opposed to the analysis by the court in accordance with the claim submitted by Clara Watson, the claim filed by the plaintiff itself became the source of analysis. Disparate treatment theory became the model or the system under which the claim filed by Watson was analyzed and subsequently the plaintiff thereby was asked to present the evidence of the intentional discrimination towards her by the Bank as claimed by her. The rationale behind this requirement of the evidence of the intentional discrimination, as indicated by the court, rests with the decision of the plaintiff to make the prima facie case of discrimination against the Bank. Prima facie case of discrimination emphasizes the position of the defendant or the employer as having a legitimate non-discriminatory reason on the basis of which the plaintiff was not promoted.

Legal Issues/ Applicable Law(s)

The legal issues emerges here from the background that a black employee, Clara Watson, is denied the supervisory position four times in a row on ...