On May 24, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Lewis v. City of Chicago that a plaintiff who does not file a timely charge challenging the adoption of a discriminatory employment practice can assert a disparate-impact claim in a charge challenging the employer’s subsequent application of that practice.
Under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act a “charge” of discrimination must be filed with the EEOC within 180 days after that the act of discrimination occurred. This 180-day filing deadline is extended to 300 days if the charge also is covered by a state or local anti-discrimination law. After the charge is filed, the EEOC initiates an investigation. The claimant can wait to until the EEOC completes its administrative investigation or the individual can request a “right to sue” letter from the EEOC. A civil action must be filed in the federal district court within 90 days from the receipt of a “right to sue” letter from the EEOC.
In July 1995, the City of Chicago administered a written examination to more than 26,000 applicants seeking employment in the Chicago Fire Department. Those who scored below 65 failed the examination. Those who scored 65-88 were deemed “qualified.” Applicants who scored 89 or higher (out of 100), were designated “well qualified.” The City announced on January 26, 1996, that it would begin drawing randomly from the top tier of scorers, those who scored 89 or above. On May 16, 1996, the City selected its first class of applicants to advance to the next stage of the selection process. It selected a second class on October 1, 1996, and repeated the process nine more times over the next six years.
In 1997, an African American applicant who scored in the “qualified” range and had not been hired as a candidate firefighter filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. Five others filed charges, and on July 28, 1998, the EEOC issued all six of them right-to-sue letters. Approximately 60 days later, they filed a civil action against the City, claiming that its practice of selecting for advancement only applicants who scored 89 or above had a "disparate impact" on African-American applicants in violation of Title VII.
In a 1971 case, Griggs v. Duke Power Co., the Court held that Title VII forbids not only overt discrimination, but also practices that are fair in form, but have a discriminatory effect. In such cases proof of discriminatory intent is not required. The “disparate impact” theory was codified by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. That law states that a disparate impact is established when a complainant proves that an employer uses an employment practice that excludes a disproportionate percentage of minority applicants and the employer cannot prove that the challenged practice is “job related,” i.e., relevant to the skills needed to perform the job.
In this case the City of Chicago sought to obtain a ruling in its favor on the ground that the Black applicants failed to file EEOC charges within 180 days after the "discriminatory act" occurred. The trial court disagreed, certified a class action and ruled in the Black applicants’ favor. The City of Chicago appealed and the Court of Appeals reversed after finding that the suit was untimely because the EEOC charge was filed more than 300 days after the discriminatory act, which was the decision to limit hiring to applicants who scored 89 or above on the written examination.
The case was appealed to the Supreme Court which unanimously reversed. It held that a plaintiff establishes a prima facie disparate impact claim by showing that an employer “uses a particular employment practice that causes a disparate impact.” In this case, the exclusion of Black applicants who passed the test, but scored below 89, was a new “employment practice” used in each round of selections.
The Lewis decision comes as a bit of a surprise to some observers, as the Roberts Court has not treated claims of discrimination very favorably. In a controversial 2007 decision, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the Court by a slim 5-4 majority rejected as untimely a case in which a female worker was paid less than men but did discover the discrepancy before 180 days after the discriminatory decision was made. That case was criticized because disparities in pay are often undiscovered or difficult to determine, especially since so many employers keep salary and pay information confidential. The effect of the Court's holding in Ledbetter was reversed by the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009. Under Lewis, every use of an unlawful employment practice that has a disparate impact is a new violation of Title VII. This will make it easier for complainants to file timely claims.
###
About the Author:
Leland Ware, a member of the Board of the Southern Regional Council, is Louis B. Redding Chair and Professor for the Study of Law and Public Policy at the University of Delaware.
On May 17, 1954, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
This decision, outlawing segregation in public education, was the product of an ongoing quest for racial equality which had begun decades before. For many at the time, the decision seemed to promise that inequalities based on race would soon become a thing of the past.
Fifty-six years later, many things have changed, but the optimism inspired by the Brown decision has sometimes been difficult to sustain. The broad consensus for racial justice which once existed has faded in many quarters. Inequalities have persisted, and efforts to correct them have often been met with fierce resistance.
The Southern Regional Council believes that the business of achieving a just society in the American South remains unfinished. Our work to illuminate opportunities for change continues
As part of the Council’s observance of the 50th Anniversary of this decision, Carol Mitchell Leon and the Clark Atlanta University Players presented a dramatization of the events leading up to the decision and its meaning.
This video features excerpts from this presentation.
SRC is an inter-racial organization founded in 1919 to combat racial injustice in the South. SRC initiated the Lillian Smith Book Awards shortly after Smith's death in 1966 to recognize authors whose writing extends the legacy of the outspoken writer, educator and social critic who challenged her fellow Southerners and all Americans on issues of social and racial justice. Since 2004 the awards have been presented by SRC in a partnership with the University of Georgia Libraries, whose Hargrett Rare Book and Manuscript Library houses a historic collection of Lillian Smith's letters and manuscripts. The Georgia Center for the Book became a partner in 2007, when the awards ceremony first became part of the Decatur Book Festival.
Click on the image below to view a video adaptation of portions of the episode of Circle chronicling the events leading up to the publication of the Appeal. Following the image is the full transcript of the episode describing the Atlanta Student Movement.
WILL THE CIRCLE BE UNBROKEN?
A Personal History of the Civil Rights Movement in Five Southern Communities
EPISODE 22: THE ATLANTA STUDENT MOVEMENT
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
Written By: Cliff Kuhn, Steve Suitts and George King with Vertamae Grosvenor
The leaders in that period were not the mayor, not the president; it was four college freshmen that started the sit-in movement, see? It was actually high schools kids who got upset because their parents couldn't register to vote that got the Voting Rights Act, see? And so in all of my lifetime, social change has come from the young while they were in school, see?
SERIES THEME MUSIC: "Will The Circle Be Unbroken?" [The Staple Singers]
NARRATOR
You are listening to Will The Circle Be Unbroken?, a personal history of the Civil Rights Movement in five southern communities and the music for those times.
During The 1940's And '50's, the Atlanta style emerged as the city's response to racial conflict. Accommodation and compromise guided the approach of the city's leaders-black and white. Warren Cochrane was a member of the small group of ministers, academics, business and professional men who made up Atlanta's black leadership.
Now, we didn't have strength enough or voting power enough to elect anybody in those days. And what we had to do was use whatever strategy we could.
We worked with the business community because they wanted the best leadership we could get, they did not want rabble-rousers. Our job was to keep the rabble-rousers out.
NARRATION
Following the victory of democracy in World War II, and the historic 1954 Supreme Court decision outlawing segregation, no small group of men--- of any color --- could manage the forces of racial change. A new, younger generation would challenge the Atlanta style.
MUSIC "There Is Something On Your Mind" [Bobby Marchan]
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
Each college student at that time, especially black college students, brought with them a peculiar kind of history that made everything gel, you know, two or three years later.
JULIAN BOND
There was this accumulation of things that PUSHED on the minds of young people; young black people in 1960.
NARRATOR
Young black American students coming of age at the end of the fifties had grown up in a period of rising expectations. They had witnessed the Montgomery bus boycott on TV, and followed the efforts of Little Rock students in the pages of Jet magazine. In 1960, Julian Bond was a student at Morehouse College in Atlanta.
JULIAN BOND
They had these Little Rock kids who were our peers, and they were so brave and so courageous, that you couldn’t help but say,"Gee, I hope if I’m ever TESTED in this way, I can behave the same way."
Our classmates included African students, who were so smug in their condemnation of our inaction. They’d say, Listen, we’re freeing OUR nations; we’re leading revolutions; we’re escaping the yoke of colonialism. All of Africa will be free before you people can drink a cup of coffee. And you know, that hurt.
NARRATOR
Student Morris Dillard…
MORRIS DILLARD
The pain had reached a point where all you needed was a spark, in the form of a tool—a mechanism through which you could protest. And of course that was provided by the sit-in movement in North Carolina. Greensboro.
MUSIC "C’mon Everybody" [Eddie Cochran]
NARRATOR
On February 1, 1960, four black college students startled the nation when they sat in at a segregated lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. By April, thousands of young people were sitting-in across the south.
JULIAN BOND
It had happened other places before, and they never caught on, they never spread. It may have been that the Associated Press and United Press broadcast fairly neutral descriptions of what was happening. And any newspaper reader could pick that up and say, "Oh, this is how you do it." It’s like an instruction manual.
NARRATOR
Atlanta students took note of this new strategy, where young, committed activists would simply sit-in at segregated facilities—refusing to leave when they were denied service because of their race. Direct and confrontational—as a tactic, it was a radical departure from the Atlanta tradition of quiet compromise and private negotiations.
Morehouse college students Julian Bond and Lonnie King recall how Atlanta’s new era of public protest began.
LONNIE KING
On the second of February 1960 I was talking to one of my best friends at the time a guy named Joseph Pierce. We were reading the paper and I was talking about what happened up in Greensboro.
I was in Yates and Milton’s Drug Store one day, which was a campus hang-out, killing time between classes, smoking and drinking coffee. And a fellow came up to me, and I didn’t know him well at all. He showed me a newspaper headline from the Atlanta Daily World. It said Greensboro students sit in for third day.
LONNIE KING
I said Julian, you see this newspaper and have you read it?
I said, "What do you mean, we?" He said, "You take this side of the drug store and I’ll take the other side and we’ll put together a little meeting of students."
ACTUALITY: STUDENT MEETING
NARRATOR
At the meeting, the students decided to involve all six of Atlanta’s black colleges in the effort. The college presidents soon got word of things and encouraged the student leaders to draft a list of their grievances.
Student leader Mary Ann Smith…
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
We were very attentive to what the presidents had to say. They said that we would sponsor it, pay for it, you know-you students write it, express your grievances in writing, expose it to the world, well through the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, and we’ll pay for it. And maybe we can initiate some activity this way. Some across-the-table type meetings, negotiations, and what have you.
JULIAN BOND
Well, this very first statement we put in the paper, "the Appeal for Human Rights" listed a LONG list of grievances, police protection; the extension of city services; parks, and things like that. So from the very first, there was this sense that this was about more than lunch counters.
It caused a shock wave to go through the Atlanta community when it was published. Governor Vandiver (who was famous as, No-Not-One-Vandiver "Not-one-black-child-will-ever-enter-a- Georgia-public-school-while-I’m-governor, Vandiver"). Said, This sounds as if it had been written in Moscow, if not in Peking.
That statement was skillfully prepared. Obviously, it was not written by students. Regrettably, it had the same overtones which are usually found in anti-American propaganda pieces.
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
Well, all of a sudden you, I won’t say hilarity, but because it was published in the New York Times, I think. New York Times. Letters came in from student governments all over the country.
MUSIC "Walk Don’t Run" [The Ventures]
NARRATOR
Atlanta University's college presidents -- part of the older black leadership, were caught in a dilemma. While it was difficult to argue with the students' demands, endorsing them would jeopardize the Atlanta style of private negotiation and threaten the power of the older leaders in the community.
They saw themselves being replaced. That I think caused a great deal of problem. You had the old guard black leadership who were upset about these young upstarts who were coming in here. For that many to make gains in a year or less that they had been working on as they saw it for 30 or 40 years. Then, of course, the whites who were in power didn't want to give up anything without you just taking it from them.
NARRATOR
But the students would not be quieted, and they had their own sense of style.
JULIAN BOND
Part of what we wanted to do was to demonstrate that Atlanta students were going to be the best organized; the most disciplined; because this was then the largest collection of black college students in America.
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
Each student leader from the various campuses would go and sort of pick students that would go to represent your college, who wanted to participate. That's the way the first one was done.
JULIAN BOND
We wanted to be the best. And surpass whatever had been done before, and whatever would be done afterward. So we wanted to hit the maximum number of places with the maximum number of people.
NARRATOR
Two of the groups at Atlanta's first sit-in demonstration were led by Julian Bond and fellow Morehouse student Charles Black.
We had cased all the joints you might say. We knew exactly how many seats there were in every place; we knew where the nearest telephones were; we knew where to put observers so they could see everything that was going on and relay messages; the whole works—we had planned it very carefully.
JULIAN BOND
200 students went all over Atlanta; different groups to different places...I took a group of people down to the City Hall cafeteria.
NARRATOR
Again, Charles Black...
CHARLES BLACK
The group that I led was at the Terminal Train Station. The city leadership was taken quite by surprise. They didn't know what to do. There were lots of reports of policemen turning around in the middle of the street in their cars. After getting the call from one place and then another, they were just spinning around, not knowing what to do.
NARRATOR
Despite the publication of the Appeal for Human Rights and sit-ins in other cities across the South, the students' occupation of ten different segregated public facilities took Atlanta by surprise. When the confusion abated, most of the students were arrested and taken to jail.
JULIAN BOND
And we were all convicted and bound over to the grand jury, and bonded out, and came back to Paschal's Restaurant for a celebratory chicken dinner. We were all heroes and heroines.
MUSIC "You Better Leave Segregation Alone" [James Bevel, Joseph Carter, Bernard Lafayette, Samuel Collier]
NARRATOR
Atlanta's older black leadership was divided. Most felt that the students' radical tactics would jeopardize their own patient work to desegregate Atlanta. But some worked along with the students; black business leader Jesse Hill...
JESSE HILL
My job was, to get them out of jail, I really did, I was pretty busy, I had quite a team...I had black professionals, doctors, lawyers, school teachers who gave me there properties...We had funds, we had bonding capacity. We were equipped. We were ready for war.
JULIAN BOND
We got out of jail because black business people here put up their property and their cash to get us out. So their immediate response was supportive and helpful. But their second response was, Gee, that's great that you've done this thing. And now that you've done it, you don't have to do it again. Let us handle it. We can deal with it. We have relationships with the White power people downtown; let black power and White power get together and work this out. That's the way we've always done it, and that's the way we'll do it now.
LONNIE KING
The people who were in the leadership at that time were unelected.
They didn't think that Atlanta was such a bad place for them. They had always had pretty good relations with the white folk. They had always put their few votes with the Northside white vote to elect fairly decent city officials, they thought.
JULIAN BOND
And I think some of us were willing to say, well, that's great, "you know, you can do it." And others said, "No, we've been depending on you to do this all this time. You haven't done it with the rapidity and speed that we insist it be done. So we're gonna have to take this into our hands again, and go for it and do something else."
NARRATOR
Again, student Morris Dillard...
MORRIS DILLARD
We created the infrastructure that was required to support a movement of this sort.
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
Hectic, that's all I remember, telephones ringing and getting flyers for the next meeting and seeing who's going to speak, setting up the program.
MORRIS DILLARD
Housewives drove carpools and they had food and they did all kinds of things that were necessary to keep the operation running.
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
And I just didn't realize until it was all over just how totally involved I was, but that was my life for several months.
MORRIS DILLARD
It wasn't a one-time shot and that's what Lonnie was telling us early on is that you've got to be prepared to stay. You can't think that just by mounting a big march downtown that the walls of segregation are gonna come down. No.
Rich's is a personal store. And our success this year and next year and the next will depend so much on how well we all know what we stand for and how well we practice our beliefs.
There was a saying at least we knew in Atlanta that if Rich's went, so would everybody else. If Rich's decided to sell green shoes at Christmas time, everybody else would sell green shoes at Christmas time too.
NARRATOR
And so Rich's Department Store became a symbolic target for the demonstrators.
I remember once I sat in Rich's and they closed down the counter. So then I got a call from the police chief. He asked me to come down there. He sent a patrol car down there to get me from our office on Auburn Avenue at that time.
JULIAN BOND
Chief Jenkins had his men pick up the leaders of the student movement, Lonnie King and Herschelle Sullivan, and take them to a meeting at the police station with Richard Rich, the head of Rich's department store.
LONNIE KING
Mr. Rich, he was extremely arrogant, extremely upset with me for quote, "disrupting commerce in his store." And he, he didn't want to hear anything I had to say. He wanted to give me a lecture. And his lecture was, that if you come back to Rich's Department Store again, I'm going to put you in jail.
JULIAN BOND
And Mr. Rich said something he NEVER should have said. He lost his temper. He said, "I don't care if another Negro EVER comes into my store." And he NEVER should have said that, because within a year, we made sure that Negroes DID NOT go in his store, and ran this boycott that eventually resulted in the integration of the Atlanta restaurants, lunch counters and so on.
Without people Rich's is just another store full of merchandise. Without people our policies are just so many theories.
NARRATOR
Black Atlanta was united behind the student-led boycott. People from different generations and occupations joined the picket lines.
Charles Black...
CHARLES BLACK
Well after it was clear that the students had the support generally of the community, everybody wanted to walk then, all the preachers, all the everybody. And the folk who had done everything they could to stop it were out there marching, young and old.
NARRATOR
Julia Bond, mother of student Julian...
And they just didn't see how they could do without Rich's, but they joined the boycott. Afterwards, so many people who had gone to Rich's and spent so much money learned that it really wasn't necessary. They could do without some of those things.
My wife was one of those who participated in the boycott. Of course, I must say I was a little selfish then. I didn't care how long they were parading around Rich's. It was saving me money!
LONNIE KING
We got these people in Atlanta, Georgia to send us their Rich's charge cards. And we put them in safety deposit boxes at Rich's. Our slogan was, "Close down your account with segregation, open up your account with freedom, send us your charge card."
MUSIC "Shop Around" [Smokey Robinson and The Miracles]
NARRATOR
As the boycott moved into the spring of 1961, Atlanta's white power structure and the older black leadership continued to negotiate. They focused on persuading the students to drop their demands until the city's potentially volatile school desegregation plan took place in the fall of 1961. At a transformative meeting they achieved their goal.
It was an extremely emotional meeting, one in which I found people who were supposed to have been on my side, siding with the merchants. It was a very excruciating feeling.
NARRATOR
Mayor Ivan Allen and the city's white business leadership leaned on the older black leaders who in turn pressured student leader Lonnie King to accept the compromise.
Rich's is a personal store. And our success this year and next year and the next will depend so much on how well we all know what we stand for and how well we practice our beliefs.
There was a saying at least we knew in Atlanta that if Rich's went, so would everybody else. If Rich's decided to sell green shoes at Christmas time, everybody else would sell green shoes at Christmas time too.
NARRATOR
And so Rich's Department Store became a symbolic target for the demonstrators.
I remember once I sat in Rich's and they closed down the counter. So then I got a call from the police chief. He asked me to come down there. He sent a patrol car down there to get me from our office on Auburn Avenue at that time.
JULIAN BOND
Chief Jenkins had his men pick up the leaders of the student movement, Lonnie King and Herschelle Sullivan, and take them to a meeting at the police station with Richard Rich, the head of Rich's department store.
LONNIE KING
Mr. Rich, he was extremely arrogant, extremely upset with me for quote, "disrupting commerce in his store." And he, he didn't want to hear anything I had to say. He wanted to give me a lecture. And his lecture was, that if you come back to Rich's Department Store again, I'm going to put you in jail.
JULIAN BOND
And Mr. Rich said something he NEVER should have said. He lost his temper. He said, "I don't care if another Negro EVER comes into my store." And he NEVER should have said that, because within a year, we made sure that Negroes DID NOT go in his store, and ran this boycott that eventually resulted in the integration of the Atlanta restaurants, lunch counters and so on.
Without people Rich's is just another store full of merchandise. Without people our policies are just so many theories.
NARRATOR
Black Atlanta was united behind the student-led boycott. People from different generations and occupations joined the picket lines.
Charles Black...
CHARLES BLACK
Well after it was clear that the students had the support generally of the community, everybody wanted to walk then, all the preachers, all the everybody. And the folk who had done everything they could to stop it were out there marching, young and old.
Some of the students felt that Lonnie King, our head, our chairman, had sold them out. And they requested his resignation. So that was one of those real emotional moments in the whole movement. People crying and carrying on, you know.
To wrap it all up, Ivan Allen went on television this same night and said that the lunch counters will open up again tomorrow; segregated. The Negroes have agreed to wait and time it with the opening of schools...It became very clear that his job was to try and work out an agreement whereby from a PR point of view, it would appear as if the white folks gave us something as opposed to black folks winning something. You follow me?
NARRATOR
As word got out about the decision to call off the boycott in return for desegregated facilities in the fall, a mass meeting was arranged. Atlanta University professor Carl Holman and attorney Leroy Johnson remember the evening.
And we'd had this big meeting at Warren Methodist Church at which point the black negotiators found how deep the feeling was about having been betrayed. And we had to go through that evening with the hope that we would keep the black community from tearing itself apart.
LEROY JOHNSON II
And the church was packed. And the students were there looking for blood. And we were sitting on the platform, nervous, trying to make certain that we could appease the crowd in the sense of trying to get them to accept the agreement and they were saying, no, no, no and all hell broke loose.
Oh, man. That meeting.... About 2,000 people had gathered. An array of leaders tried to calm the crowd. And so Martin King's father got up, King, Sr., and he attempted to get them to calm down. He said that he devoted 30 years of his life to the Civil Rights Movement in Atlanta and before he could go any further, this lady up in the stands said, "And that's what's wrong." And she proceeded to come down and she read the riot act to everybody there.
I can remember this nurse, she was in her uniform, she was a nurse for Dr.
Albert Davis, storming up the center of the church, saying, "You mean to tell me, you know, I tore up my credit card." [LAUGHTER]
Some of the students felt that Lonnie King, our head, our chairman, had sold them out. And they requested his resignation. So that was one of those real emotional moments in the whole movement. People crying and carrying on, you know.
LONNIE KING
Oh, God, the church went up. I mean you've seen these magical moments. The church went up. I mean they just, it was something. I felt sorry for King, because King had laid the groundwork in a lot of ways, but remember now these people are operating on incremental change. And all of a sudden here's revolutionary change.
Martin King by that time had eased in the back, Jr. And when they booed his daddy, he started crying. Tears started coming down...So finally, Martin said, "Let me talk."
We must honestly say to Atlanta that time is running out. If some concrete changes for good are not made soon, Negro leaders of this city will find it impossible to convince the masses of Negroes of good faith of the negotiations presently taking place.
LEROY JOHNSON II
Martin Luther King, Jr. came to the meeting and spoke to that crowd and he said in essence that this agreement may not be all that we want, but it's an agreement we made and I think we ought to accept it. And shift the burden to the white folks and let them break it. But his speech was so terrific and I never thought anybody could have quelled that crowd.
Atlanta needs an Amos to cry out, let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. Atlanta needs another Jefferson to scratch across the pages of history words lifted to cosmic proportions: We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal.
LEROY JOHNSON II
He stopped that crowd and the students then agreed to accept the agreement and that's what happened. But for Martin Luther King it never would have been accepted.
NARRATOR
In the fall of 1961, Rich's Department Store and some other facilities, including the public schools, began to desegregate with a token number of blacks. Although the coalition of students and community members held together, the power of the older black leadership was broken. The new direct action tactics continued through the mid-sixties forcing desegregation into the open. As new leadership emerged, they too would discover the challenges of power—as the Atlanta style proved resilient once again.
MUSIC "Giant Steps" [John Coltrane]
CREDITS
Key to Archival Collections 1 Highlander Folk School Collection, Highlander Research and Education Center, New Market, TN 2 WRFG-FM/"Living Atlanta," Collection, courtesy of Atlanta History Center, Atlanta, GA 3 "Dawn’s Early Light," Ralph McGill Papers, Woodruff Library, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 4 Oral History Collection of Martin Luther King, Jr., license granted by Intellectual Properties Management, Atlanta, GA 5 Howard University, Ralphe J. Bunche Oral History Collection, Washington, DC 6 Atlanta-Fulton County Public Library, Special Collections, Atlanta, GA 7 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Southern Historical Collection & Southern Folklife Collection, Wilson Library, Chapel Hill, NC 8 WSB Television News Video Archive, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
Fifty years ago, Atlantans opened their newspapers to find "An Appeal for Human Rights," the manifesto that marked the beginning of the Atlanta Student Movement. The reaction to this statement on the part of local officials was swift, but the nature of the reactions varied widely. This video features the modulated response from Atlanta Mayor William Hartsfield and the very critical remarks from Georgia Governor Ernest Vandiver.
Well, this very first statement we put in the paper, "the Appeal for Human Rights" listed a LONG list of grievances, police protection; the extension of city services; parks, and things like that. So from the very first, there was this sense that this was about more than lunch counters.
It caused a shock wave to go through the Atlanta community when it was published. Governor Vandiver (who was famous as, No-Not-One-Vandiver "Not-one-black-child-will-ever-enter-a- Georgia-public-school-while-I’m-governor, Vandiver"). Said, This sounds as if it had been written in Moscow, if not in Peking.
That statement was skillfully prepared. Obviously, it was not written by students. Regrettably, it had the same overtones which are usually found in anti-American propaganda pieces.
MARY ANN SMITH WILSON
Well, all of a sudden you, I won’t say celebrity, but because it was published in the New York Times, I think. New York Times. Letters came in from student governments all over the country.
A group of Atlanta's leaders recently gathered to discuss the impact of the region's changing demographics.
Georgia's Latino population grew 300% between 1990 and 2000, and it grew 70% between 2000 and 2007. Much of this population growth has resulted from people moving from other regions of the United States, from Mexico, or from other parts of Latin America. At the same time, the African American population in the region has also continued to increase, largely due to the fact that more Blacks have moved into the region than have moved away.
This has produced a novel situation in which African Americans and Latinos are increasingly encountering each other in work settings, schools, neighborhoods, and other places. Latinos comprise a majority of the student population at many public schools in Atlanta and the adjacent DeKalb County. In other schools the student population includes large Black and Latino contingents but no ethnic majority.
In many other parts of the country, the interaction between African Americanand Latino populations has been marked by conflict and competition. The Atlanta leaders who gathered on this recent evening, under the auspices of the Leadership Atlanta Aumni/Membership Program, sought to address whether this same conflict and competition will characterize the interaction between these communities in the Atlanta region. the listened intently as Rich Pelligrino and representatives of the Cobb United for Change Coalition found a way for African Americans and Latinos to come together to address the common problems of crime, violence, and racial profiling.
To learn more about the Best Practices which the Council has identified for bringing communities together, or to obtain copies of the Council's recent report, contact Charles Johnson at charles.johnson@hklaw.com.
It was unfortunate that Dr. Dorothy I. Height, who at 97 doesn’t let much stop her, wasn’t able to make the meeting because of the weather. It was puzzling to see the National Action Network’s Rev. Al Sharpton included in the meeting, as I’m not sure that the NAN has done work on employment and unemployment, though Sharpton has been an effective spokesman on race matters. Still, the NAN is not an organization of the stature of the NAACP or Urban League. If another leader might have been included, it should have been the Rev. Jesse Jackson, leader of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, or a labor leader like Bill Lucy of AFSCME and the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists. And it is unfortunate that Dr. Height could not send an NCNW representative so that African American women would be represented in the conversation. I quibble. I’m glad the meeting took place.
After indicating that he is the President of “all” Americans, I wondered whether President Obama would ever meet with African American leaders. I do hope they shared the devastating impact unemployment has had on the African American community. Our unemployment rate is not 9.7 percent, as the overall rate is. It is not the 16.7 percent that is officially reported. According to my own calculations, the black unemployment rate is at least 28.7 percent. Would such a rate be acceptable if “all” Americans were experiencing it?
The visual of black leaders leaving the White House reminded me of the tortured history of African Americans with White House leaders. In the nineteenth century, only two African Americans visited the white House in a non-service capacity. President Lincoln signed Sojourner Truth’s autograph book when she visited the White House, and President Rutherford Hayes invited Frederick Douglas to the White House for a conversation.
President Theodore Roosevelt had Booker T. Washington as a dinner guest on October 16, 1901. This is the first time that an African American had dinner in the White House, and it was the last time, during Roosevelt’s term, that an African American was invited to dinner. Booker T. had the opportunity, on other occasions, to visit the White House, and several African American leaders were invited to receptions, but it was not until the latter part of the twentieth century that African Americans were regular dinner guests at the White House. Imagine the irony, then, that now an African American woman, Desiree Rogers, is the gatekeeper who draws up lists of White House guests.
President Woodrow Wilson, for all his academic acumen, was extremely hostile to African American people. History does not record a regular presence of African Americans until the presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, was an outspoken opponent of racism. She invited Marian Anderson to entertain at the White House, and was at least partly responsible for her historic concert at the Lincoln Memorial. President Roosevelt also had a “kitchen cabinet” of African American advisors that included NAACP President Walter White, economist Robert Weaver (the first African American to serve on a Presidential cabinet, as Secretary of HUD under President Lyndon B. Johnson), and Mary McLeod Bethune, who was Roosevelt’s special advisor on Minority Affairs.
One might think that with an African American man in the White House, there is no need for African American leaders to clamor for regular attention from this President. But African American leaders should not take President Obama for granted and assume that, because of his race, he will pay special attention to black issues. He should not. Instead, African American leaders must be as insistent with this President as they would with any other. And indeed, they must look back to the history of the kitchen cabinet to develop a relationship with President Obama that provides him with regular input about African American issues, just as he is gaining information about labor issues, women’s issues, gay and lesbian issues, Latino issues, and other issues. All of these groups, I believe, have had meetings with our President. Why not African Americans?
Hopefully, last week’s meeting will be the first of many. And, hopefully, beyond meetings, work will be done both to lower the unemployment rate and close the black/white unemployment gap.
Dr. Julianne Malveaux is an economist, author and commentator and the fifteenth President of Bennett College for Women in Greensboro, North Carolina. She can be reached at presbennett@bennett.edu.
4, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Lewis v. City of Chicago that a plaintiff who does not file a timely charge challenging the adoption of a discriminatory employment practice can assert a disparate-impact claim in a charge challenging the employer’s subsequent application of that practice.
4, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Lewis v. City of Chicago that a plaintiff who does not file a timely charge challenging the adoption of a discriminatory employment practice can assert a disparate-impact claim in a charge challenging the employer’s subsequent application of that practice.
n 26,000 applicants seeking employment in the Chicago Fire Department. Those who scored below 65 failed the examination. Those who scored 65-88 were deemed “qualified.” Applicants who scored 89 or higher (out of 100), were designated “well qualified.” The City announced on January 26, 1996, that it would begin drawing randomly from the top tier of scorers, those who scored 89 or above. On May 16, 1996, the City selected its first class of applicants to advance to the next stage of the selection process. It selected a second class on October 1, 1996, and repeated the process nine more times over the next six years.
on comes as a bit of a surprise to some observers, as the Roberts Court has not treated claims of discrimination very favorably. In a controversial 2007 decision, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the Court by a slim 5-4 majority rejected as untimely a case in which a female worker was paid less than men but did discover the discrepancy before 180 days after the discriminatory decision was made. That case was criticized because disparities in pay are often undiscovered or difficult to determine, especially since so many employers keep salary and pay information confidential. The effect of the Court's holding in Ledbetter was reversed by the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009. Under Lewis, every use of an unlawful employment practice that has a disparate impact is a new violation of Title VII. This will make it easier for complainants to file timely claims.
Leland Ware, a member of the Board of the Southern Regional Council, is Louis B. Redding Chair and Professor for the Study of Law and Public Policy at the University of Delaware.
