The Supreme Court of the United States recently handed down a significant ruling clarifying the time within which plaintiffs may file disparate-impact claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. In Lewis v. City of Chicago, the Court held that plaintiffs may challenge the application of an employment practice by a disparate-impact claim even if they did not timely challenge the earlier adoption of that practice. In that case, beginning in 1995, the Chicago Fire Department administered a written exam to applicants and made hiring decisions based upon their scores. More than 300 days after the July 1995 announcement of how the City planned to use the test results, an African-American applicant who was not hired filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging that the City's practice of selecting applicants caused a disparate impact on African-Americans in violation of Title VII. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the unlawful employment practice was not just the adoption of the test, but also the application of the test, which occurred each time the City hired firefighters. As a result, to have a timely claim, the firefighters only needed to prove that the City used an unlawful practice that caused a disparate impact during the limitations period. The Supreme Court's ruling is important because it narrows an employer's potential statute of limitations defense to disparate-impact claims. As a result, employers should be aware that they may be subject to disparate-impact claims based on policies instituted years ago if such policies are still utilized in making employment decisions.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
