Dubious Protected Class Distinctions: Eliminating the Role of Replacement Identity in a Discharged Title VII Plaintiff's Case
Karen G Hong
Abstract
Karen G Hong
Abstract
Title VII prohibits employers from discharging an employee on the basis of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. In cases involving an allegation of discriminatory discharge, the federal circuit courts of appeals have disagreed on whether to consider in the prima facie case the identity of the person the defendant employer has hired to replace the plaintiff. The majority of these courts have held that courts should not require the plaintiff to prove that a person outside of the plaintiff's protected class replaced the plaintiff in order to establish a prima facie case for employment discrimination. This Note argues that, because the underlying policy of Title VII is to protect individuals, not classes of individuals, from employment discrimination, consideration of replacement identity has no valid place in a discriminatory discharge case brought under Title VII.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Title VII prohibits employers from discharging an employee on the basis of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. In cases involving an allegation of discriminatory discharge, the federal circuit courts of appeals have disagreed on whether to consider in the prima facie case the identity of the person the defendant employer has hired to replace the plaintiff. The majority of these courts have held that courts should not require the plaintiff to prove that a person outside of the plaintiff's protected class replaced the plaintiff in order to establish a prima facie case for employment discrimination. This Note argues that, because the underlying policy of Title VII is to protect individuals, not classes of individuals, from employment discrimination, consideration of replacement identity has no valid place in a discriminatory discharge case brought under Title VII.
Key concepts: Plaintiff, Prima facie, Allegation, Law, Identity (music), Political science, Employment discrimination, Philosophy