This discussion was prepared by Daniella, Place4Papes discussion board post writer (https://place-4-papers.com/write-my-discussion-board-post/)

Age, sex, gender and social status, among other factors, have been the bases for discrimination in different forms among different people. Regardless of the reasons or legal justifications provided, it remains a shameful humiliating act. Those who discriminate against other people, and the people who suffer the cruel act, have been and still are in controversial relations.

Disparate treatment and disparate impact are both theories that address a form of discrimination that often occurs between employers and employees in relation to discriminative actions and the factors mentioned earlier. Both disparate impact and disparate treatment theories address the legitimacy of discrimination claims by an employer against his/her employees.

The Most Important Distinctions between Disparate Treatment and Disparate Impact Theories

According to the U.S. Supreme Court, disparate treatment is a discriminative situation whereby an employee or a group of employees are treated less favorably by their employer, due to their skin color, race, origins or religion. The basis for disparate impact theory includes the following issues. The first one is a prior probability that the discrimination happened before the provision and examination of evidence that proves its occurrence. The second basis is rooted in the evidence (evidentiary signal), which confirms the occurrence or non-occurrence of discrimination. Lastly, there is the cost of finding, gathering, and presenting evidence (information cost) that can establish an alleged discrimination.

Disparate impact addresses facially neutral employment discriminatory practices, which tend to justify discriminatory actions of an employer against one group of employees more than another group of employees, but cannot be justified by any form of business necessity. The disparate impact theory is based on the following. Firstly, one should mention the intent-based theory, which explains the reason for unintended discrimination. Secondly, it is based on the causation theory, which distinguishes between the prohibition of facially neutral, and the criterion for the prohibition. Thirdly, there are theories based on effects, which argue that the effect of any disparate action should be subjected to the judicial process.

A premeditated discrimination process with noticeable intentions makes disparate treatment the worst form of discrimination among the two disparities. In conclusion, both disparate impact and disparate treatment are discriminative in nature and should be handled with the necessary legal responsibility. Allowing disparities to thrive is like promoting inequality and segregation.