Quote:

---

mvass : for example?

---

Quote:

---

What regions of the country were the applications sent to?

---

Quote:

---

What were the positive and negative controls?

---

Quote:

---

What kinds of jobs were applied for?  Were certain jobs more likely to exhibit "discriminatory effects"?

---

Quote:

---

Were the results statistically significant?

---

Quote:

---

Who evaluated the applications, and how were they evaluated?

---

Quote:

---

Has the trend changed over time?

---

Quote:

---

Were reasons given why certain people did not get the jobs?

---

Quote:

---

Allegedly, the only difference was a name - how was it determined that race was the separating factor, rather than some other psycho-social factor related to the names that were chosen?

---

Quote:

---

That is, how do you know it wasn't religious discrimination?  By the way, sexual and racial discrimination are two very different things with very different underlying causes - it seems suspect to me that a well-designed scientific study would simultaneously try to test for both of them.

---

Quote:

---

There are literally hundreds of things to consider, and yet we know nothing about the study other than that three names were used and (seemingly) more white males got jobs than blacks or women.  Maybe racism was the reason, but I don't think it can be concluded with certainty from the information is provided.

---

Quote:

---

and girls more likely to hire girl

---

Quote:

---

Fauch:
I suspect the difference between Shaniqua Johnson (black) and Mary Johnson (black) would be greater than between Mary Johnson (black) and Mary Johnson (white), all other things held constant. The discrimination would come from the suspicion that someone named "Shaniqua" grew up in the ghetto and was brought up in ghetto culture - possibly raised by the kind of people who would name her Shaniqua. Parents who want their kids to succeed will give them normal names.

---

Quote:

---

I think smithey said that most of the top positions are hold by white males.
may it be something like white males are more likely to hire white males, black males more likely to hire black males and girls more likely to hire girl for exemple?

that is to say, not exactly racism, but rather some kind of support for a community to which you think you belong?

---

Quote:

---

For the 2000s, 11 per cent of whites gave anti-white bias the maximum 10 out of 10 rating, compared with only two per cent of whites who did so for anti-black bias.

---

Quote:

---

Monica Evans, edited by Jason Vaughn

4:52 p.m. CST, January 27, 2011
KANSAS CITY, MO.—
The City of Kansas City, for the second time in a week, is on the losing end of a multi-million dollar employment discrimination lawsuit after a jury on Thursday awarded two former city employees who said that they were the target of reverse discrimination over $2 million in damages.

Jordan Griffin and Coleen Low, both former analysts for the city, were awarded $345,000 and $517,000, respectively, by a Jackson County jury. Griffin, a former senior analyst and acting commissioner of Revenue, says that she was dubbed "White Chocolate" in the false belief that she would favor minority hires. Griffin says she was harassed when she didn't participate in the biased-hiring practice.

"I was expected to be anti-white, not fair and impartial," said Griffin, who says that she was never allowed to interview for the commissioner of Revenue position on a permanent basis because it was pre-determined that the position would be filled by an African-American.

"You dont judge people my the color of their skin and you don't retaliate against them for trying to stand up for their rights," said Griffin."Let's pick the right person, the most qualified person for a job."

When senior analyst Coleen Low spoke up in Griffin's behalf, she says that the city laid her off.

"I let my boss know that I didn't feel it was fair the way they were treating her, and apparently that made me a target as well," said Low.

While the jury ruled in favor of the former employees, Saskia Jacobs, the city's assistant city attorney, says the city did nothing wrong.

"We believe that the reduction in force was a bonified reduction in force," said Jacobs. "The City laid off approximately 75 people that year of which these two were (among), and we believe it was not based on age or race or retaliation for anything."

Griffin and Low say that they hope the verdict speaks loud and clear and forces the Kansas City to rethink its policies and practices. In addition to the compensatory damages, the former employees were also awarded $900,000 a piece in punitive damages. But under Missouri state law, half of that award will go to the state.

---

Quote:

---

DAYTON — The city’s Civil Service Board and the U.S. Department of Justice have agreed on a lower passing score for the police recruit exam after it was rejected because not enough blacks passed the exam.

The city lowered both written exams a combined 15 points that resulted in 258 more people passing the exam, according to a statement released Thursday by Civil Service officials. The agreement allows the city to immediately resume its plans to hire police and firefighters.

The original passing scores determined by Civil Service required candidates to answer 57 of 86 (66 percent) questions correctly on one portion and 73 of 102 (72 percent) on the other. The lowered benchmark requires candidates to answer 50 of 86 (58 percent) questions correctly and 64 of 102 (63 percent) of questions on the other.

A total of 748 people passed the exam under the new benchmarks. It is unclear the demographics of those who passed.

The passing candidates will undergo preliminary background checks and, once that hurdle is cleared, will be subject to an oral interview. Those dates have not been determined.

The Justice Department’s rejection of the passing scores last month delayed the city’s firefighter’s exam that was slated for April 2. A makeup date has yet to be set for the exam.

The city said it wants to put new hires on the street in both police and fire departments by next year to replace dozens of retirees that have left public safety forces near all-time lows.

---

Quote:

---

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that white firefighters in New Haven were subjected to race discrimination when the city threw out a promotional examination on which they had done well and black firefighters poorly.

“The city rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, adding that the possibility of a lawsuit from minority firefighters was not a lawful justification for the city’s action.

“Fear of litigation alone,” Justice Kennedy wrote, “cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions.”


The 5-to-4 ruling, which reversed an appeals court decision joined by Judge Sonia Sotomayor, now a Supreme Court nominee, will have broad impact, lawyers specializing in employment discrimination law said.

.......

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, reading a dissenting statement from the bench, said the majority had undermined a crucial civil rights law. “Congress endeavored to promote equal opportunity in fact, and not simply in form,” she said. “The damage today’s decision does to that objective is untold.”
....


Justice Kennedy, writing for himself and the four members of the court’s conservative wing, said the case required the court to try to reconcile two aspects of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits race discrimination in employment.

The “original, foundational” core of Title VII, Justice Kennedy wrote, prohibits intentional discrimination against individuals on the basis of race — “disparate treatment,” in the legal jargon. But the law also prohibits some seemingly neutral practices that have a “disparate impact” on members of racial groups.

.....

In a concurrence, Justice Scalia predicted that the court would soon have to reach the larger constitutional question. “The war between disparate impact and equal protection will be waged sooner or later,” he wrote, “and it behooves us to begin thinking about how — and on what terms — to make peace between them.”

....

In her statement from the bench, Justice Ginsburg said the firefighters who sued “understandably attract the court’s empathy.” (In her written dissent, she said the plaintiffs “attract this court’s sympathy.”)

Justice Alito, in his concurrence, said that was not enough.

“ ‘Sympathy’ is not what petitioners have a right to demand,” Justice Alito wrote. “What they have a right to demand is evenhanded enforcement of the law — of Title VII’s prohibition against discrimination based on race. And that is what, until today’s decision, has been denied them.”

---

Quote:

---

Liberal:
1.favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

2.( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3.of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.

Synonyms: Progressive, broad-minded, unprejudiced, beneficent, charitable, openhanded, munificent, unstinting, lavish. See generous. See ample.

Antonyms (opposites): Reactionary, intolerant, niggardly.

Conservative:
1.disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

2.cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.

3.traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

Synonyms: Couldn't find any

Antonyms: couldn't find any

---