Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1871:
Basic Premise: It is unconstitutional to discriminate against a person because of that person's race.
Impact on HR decisions: Policies, procedures and practices must NOT permit the possibility of racial discrimination.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 -- Amended 1972:
Basic Premise: It is unconstitutional to discriminate because or religion, sex or national origin.
Impact on HR decisions: Expanded the Civil Rights Act and all policies, procedures and practices must NOT allow discrimination because of race, religion, sex or national origin.

Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 -- Amended in 1978 & 1986:
Basic Premise: Prohibits discrimination against people 40 years of age or older.
Impact on HR decisions: Expanded the Civil Rights Act and all policies, procedures and practices must NOT allow discrimination because of age, race, religion, sex or national origin.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973:
Basic Premise: Prohibits discrimination because of physical or mental impairment that limits one or more major life activities.
Impact on HR decisions: Expanded the Civil Rights Act by mandating that employers who have a Federal contract which exceeds $50,000 or more to develop and post an Affirmative Action Plan that leads to employment of persons with physical or mental handicap, age, race, religion, sex or national origin.

Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978:
Basic Premise: Prohibits discrimination against a person because she is pregnant.
Impact on HR decisions: Expanded the Civil Rights Act and all policies, procedures and practices must NOT allow discrimination because of pregnancy, physical or mental handicap, age, race, religion, sex or national origin. Guarantees a job upon return from pregnancy leave.

Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986:
Basic Premise: Made it illegal to hire people who are illegal immigrants.
Impact on HR decisions: Employers MUST obtain proper documentation of all employees as employers are subject to a $10,000 for every illegal employee.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):
Basic Premise: Prohibits discrimination against "qualified persons with disabilities" during all employment practices including job application, hiring, firing, advancement, and compensation.
Impact on HR decisions: This Act expanded the Civil Rights Act and all policies, procedures and practices must NOT allow discrimination against otherwise qualified persons who have a physical or mental handicap, age, race, religion, sex or national origin.

Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1991:
Basic Premise: Makes it possible for an employee to recover significant monetary damages if an employer discriminates in a malicious way because of physical or mental handicap, age, race, religion, sex or national origin.
Impact on HR decisions: The employer must NOT allow discrimination during employment because of physical or mental handicap, age, race, religion, sex or national origin.

Griggs v. Duke Power Company:
Basic Premise: Any job selection criteria MUST be a Bonafide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) and therefore directly related to ability to perform on-the-job.
Impact on HR decisions: Employment forms and procedures must be checked to insure that no one is being excluded from the pool of applicants for reasons not directly related to ability to perform the job.

Albermarle Paper Company v. Moody:
Basic Premise: If testing is used to choose which candidates to hire, that testing must NOT discriminate against women and minorities.
Impact on HR decisions: Employment procedures must be checked to insure that women and minorities are NOT being excluded from the pool of applicants by any policy, practice custom or usage that is not directly related to ability to perform the job. Burden of Proof is on the employer to prove that any device used for selection actually measures ability to perform on-the-job.

Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp.:
Basic Premise: It is against the law to impose standards that apply only to women.
Impact on HR decisions: Job application forms, interviews and job practices must NOT discriminate against women. If testing is used, it must be proved valid and non-discriminatory.

Weber v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.:
Basic Premise: Race-conscious Affirmative Action plans are legal -- however it is illegal to use a quota system to reserve placement into such programs.
Impact on HR decisions: It is legal to develop and implement an Affirmative Action plans as long as admission is not based on a quota system.

Dothard v. Ralwlinson:
Basic Premise: It is illegal to discriminate against a potential employee based on job height and weight.
Impact on HR decisions: It is the employer's responsibility to prove that height and weight requirements are essential to ability to perform on-the-job if such standards are used.

University of California Regents v Bakke:
Basic Premise: It is illegal to discriminate against anyone if the basis for discrimination is a quota. However, race may be taken into account during admission decisions.
Impact on HR decisions: Race may be taken into account as long as the Affirmative Action plan does not use quotas.

American Tobacco Company v. Patterson:
Basic Premise: Allows seniority to be used as a basis for retention during reduction in force even when doing so has an adverse impact on later hired minority workers.
Impact on HR decisions: It is permissible to base retention on seniority. It is therefore important to maintain accurate employment records that state exact dates of employment.

Firefighters Local Union #1984 v. Carl W. Stotts:
Basic Premise: Allows seniority to be used as a basis for retention during reduction in force even when doing so has an adverse impact on later hired minority workers as long as adversely impacted minority workers were NOT previously discriminated against.
Impact on HR decisions: Employees who can prove they were adversely impacted by previous discrimination may benefit from Affirmative Action even during a layoff.

Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson:
Basic Premise: Sexual harassment is illegal and the employer is guilty if they know about it and do not stop it, or should have know about it and did not act.
Impact on HR decisions: Employers MUST have a sexual harassment policy and procedures in place and these must be acted upon whenever a sexual harassment complaint comes to light.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC):
Basic Premise: Provides a Federal Agency to which employees can complain as this agencies job is to enforce civil rights policies.
Impact on HR decisions: It is necessary to put policies and procedures and practices that eliminate discrimination and sexual harassment in place. Furthermore, employers MUST cooperate with EEOC and MUST NOT discriminate against employees who have exercised their right to file a complaint.

Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures:
Basic Premise: It is important NOT to discriminate against any group and the Burden of Proof is on the employer to prove that non-discrimination is the case.
Impact on HR decisions: Non-discriminatory policies, practices, procedures and techniques must be used during employee selection.

Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures: Adverse Impact:
Basic Premise: Women and minorities must be hired at a rate equivalent to 80% of that of the highest employment achieving group.
Impact on HR decisions: Accurate records must be kept as it is the employer's responsibility to prove that all employment decisions were fair and in compliance with all applicable statutes and laws.

Sexual Harassment:
Basic Premise: Both hostile environment and quid-pro-quo sexual harassment are illegal. Interpretation of whether or not sexual harassment has occurred is to be determined by "a reasonable woman" who knows the facts of the allegations.
Impact on HR decisions: Employers MUST have a sexual harassment policy and procedures in place and these must be acted upon whenever an instance of sexual harassment comes to light.