Common Ground Books
Common Ground Open
The Arts in Society
Information, Medium & Society
Climate Change: Impacts and Responses
Diversity in Organizations, Communities & Nations
Global Studies
Spaces & Flows
Design Principles & Practices
New Directions in the Humanities
Interdisciplinary Social Sciences
Aging & Social Change
Tourism and Leisure Studies
The Learner
Organization Studies
Religion in Society
Food Studies
Communication and Media Studies
e-Learning and Innovative Pedagogies
Sport & Society
On Sustainability
Technology, Knowledge & Society
World Universities Forum
The Constructed Environment
Health, Wellness & Society
The Image
Science in Society
The Inclusive Museum
The Future of Disparate Impact in Britain and the United States
Views: 459
- Title: The Future of Disparate Impact in Britain and the United States: Shoot the Wards Cove Quota Myth and Recognize Plantation Economy Cases
- Author(s): Michael Connolly
- Publisher: Common Ground Research Networks
- Collection: Common Ground Research Networks
- Series: Diversity in Organizations, Communities & Nations
- Journal Title: The International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities, and Nations: Annual Review
- Keywords: Disparate Impact/Indirect Discrimination, Plantation Economies, Quota Fear, Subjective Hiring Practices, New Definitions of Disparate Impact, Wards Cove v Atonio, Griggs v Duke Power, Perera v Civil Service Commission
- Volume: 4
- Issue: 1
- Date: February 02, 2006
- ISSN: 1447-9532 (Print)
- ISSN: 1447-9583 (Online)
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9532/CGP/v04/39582
- Citation: Connolly, Michael. 2006. "The Future of Disparate Impact in Britain and the United States: Shoot the Wards Cove Quota Myth and Recognize Plantation Economy Cases." The International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities, and Nations: Annual Review 4 (1): 0-0. doi:10.18848/1447-9532/CGP/v04/39582.
All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 2006, Common Ground Research Networks, All Rights Reserved
Abstract
A comparison between UK and US law on the potential of disparate impact law, including subjective hiring practices and whether recognising some cases could lead to quotas.
