Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Question 1

Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer to…

Answer 1

fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2.

Question 2

What are the elements of a prima face disparate treatment case under Title VII?

Answer 2

1. Plaintiff is a member of a protected class;
2. Plaintiff was qualified for the position he/she sought to obtain or retain;
3. Plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action; and
4. Adverse employment action occurred under circumstances that give rise to an inference of intentional discrimination (usually shown by proving that a similarly situated employee outside the Plaintiff’s protected class was treated more favorably by the employer).

Question 3

T/F: a plaintiff can bring a Title VII discrimination and/or retaliation claim against individual defendants.

Answer 3

False. Plaintiffs may bring Title VII discrimination and retaliation claims solely against their employers.

Question 4

Who qualifies as a “similarly situated” comparator in a Title VII disparate treatment claim?

Answer 4

To be similarly situated, a comparator must be someone who is “directly comparable to the plaintiff in all material respects.” Wiggins, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 25420, at *7 (3d Cir. 2022).

Question 5

T/F: race or color discrimination can occur when the victim and the person who inflicted the discrimination are the same color or race.

Answer 5

True.

Question 6

T/F: the defendant must prove that its stated legitimate, non-discriminatory reason motivated its employment decision.

Answer 6

False. The defendant only must articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. Does not have to prove that it actually motivated the defendant’s decision.

Question 7

What is the evidentiary framework for proving a Title VII claim under a pretext theory?

Answer 7

1. The plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination.
2. The burden of production shifts to the defendant to articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action.
3. The plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s stated reason is a pretext for unlawful discrimination.

Question 8

What are some relevant factors in evaluating if the defendant’s stated reason is pretext for unlawful discrimination?

Answer 8

1. Similarly situated employees outside the plaintiff’s protected class were treated differently.
2. The defendant’s previous treatment of the plaintiff.
3. The defendant’s policy and practice regarding employees in the plaintiff’s protected class.

Question 9

At the summary judgment stage, what does a plaintiff have to show to survive summary judgment?

Answer 9

The plaintiff generally must submit evidence which (1) casts sufficient doubt upon each of the legitimate reasons proffered by the defendant so that a factfinder could reasonably conclude that each reason was a fabrication; or (2) allows the factfinder to infer that discrimination was more likely than not a motivating or determinative cause of the adverse employment action. Fuentes v. Perskie, 32 F.3d 759 (3d Cir. 1994).

Question 10

T/F: employment decisions based on sexual or gender stereotypes is barred by Title VII.

Answer 10

True. Sex stereotyping is a type of sex discrimination barred by Title VII. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989).

Question 11

Can a plaintiff bring a sex discrimination or sexual harassment claim if their alleged harasser was the same sex?

Answer 11

Yes. Nothing in Title VII bars a claim of sex discrimination or sexual harassment just because the plaintiff and the defendant/harasser are of the same sex. Oncale v. Sundowner Off-shore Servs., 523 U.S. 75 (1998).

Question 12

Under Title VII, it is unlawful for an employer to refuse to make X for the religious practices of employees and prospective employees unless it would impose Y.

Answer 12

X = reasonable accommodations
Y = an undue hardship
Trans World Airlines, Inc. V. Hardison, 432 U.S. 66 (1977).

Question 13

What is an “undue hardship” for purposes of making a reasonable accommodation for religious practices under Title VII?

Answer 13

Title VII requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business. Groff v. DeJoy (SCOTUS 2023).

Question 14

If the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination under a disparate impact theory, what does the employer have to prove in response?

Answer 14

An employer may defend against liability by demonstrating that the practice is “job relat-ed for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.” 42 U.S.C. § 20003-2(k(1)(A)(i); Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009).

Question 15

If the employer in a disparate impact case proves that the requirement is job-related, what can the plaintiff then prove to prevail?

Answer 15

a plaintiff may still succeed by showing that an employer refuses to adopt an available al-terative employment practice that has less disparate impact and serves the employer’s legitimate needs. 42 U.S.C. § 20003-2(k(1)(A)(i); Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009).

Question 16

T/F: an employer is not permitted to give and act on the results of a professionally developed ability test.

Answer 16

False. It is not an unlawful employment practice for an employer to give and act upon the re-sults of any professionally developed ability tests, if it is not designed, intended, or used to discriminate because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(h).

Question 17

What is required to show a prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII?

Answer 17

To establish a prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII, a plaintiff must tender evi-dence that: (1) she engaged in activity protected by Title VII; (2) the employer took an ad-verse employment action against her; and (3) there was a causal connection between her participation in the protected activity and the adverse employment action. Moore v. City of Phila., 461 F.3d 331 (3d Cir. 2006).

Question 18

In a Title VII retaliation claim, what is required to prove that the employer took an adverse employment action against the employee?

Answer 18

a plaintiff must show that a reasonable employee would have found the challenged action materially adverse.

Question 19

To prevail on a Title VII retaliation claim, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s desire to retaliate was X of the adverse employment action.

Answer 19

The but-for cause.

Question 20

What happens next if the employee establishes a prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII?

Answer 20

the burden shifts to the employer to advance a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for its conduct.

Question 21

If an employer advances a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for its conduct in a Title VII retaliation case, what is the plaintiff required to prove?

Answer 21

The plaintiff must convince the factfinder both that the employer’s proffered explanation is false and that retaliation was the real reason for the adverse employment action.

Question 22

When does the plaintiff’s time period for reporting a claim to the EEOC begin to run when s/he is constructively discharged?

Answer 22

When a plaintiff is allegedly constructively discharged, the time period for reporting to the EEOC begins to run only after the employee resigns his or her employment. Green v. Brennan, 578 U.S. (2016).

Question 23

T/F: courts interpret Title VII and the PHRA similarly.

Answer 23

True. Claims under the PHRA are interpreted coextensively with Title VII claims. Atkinson v. Lafayette College, 460 F.3d 447 (3d Cir. 2006).

Question 24

What is the BFOQ defense in Title VII actions?

Answer 24

It is not an “unlawful employment practice” for an employer to hire and employ employ-ees on the basis of religion, sex, or national origin if religion, sex, or national origin are a “bona fide occupational qualification” reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the particular business or enterprise. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e).

Question 25

Is a prevailing plaintiff entitled to attorneys’ fees under Title VII?

Answer 25

Under Title VII, a prevailing plaintiff is normally entitled to attorneys’ fees in all but spe-cial circumstances. Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412 (1978).

Question 26

Is a defendant entitled to attorneys’ fees under Title VII?

Answer 26

A trial court may award attorneys’ fees to a prevailing defendant upon finding that the plaintiff’s action was frivolous, unreasonable, without foundation, or pursued in bad faith. Id.

Question 27

What constitutes an “adverse employment action” under Title VII?

Answer 27

To make out a Title VII discrimination claim, a plaintiff must show some harm respecting an identifiable term or condition of employment. Plaintiff does not have to show significant, serious, or substantial harm. Muldrow v. City of St. Louis (SCOTUS 2024)

Question 28

What is the definition of quid pro quo harassment?

Answer 28

The Third Circuit has defined quid pro quo harassment as follows: unwelcome sexual ad-vances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual na-ture constitute sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment or (2) submis-sion to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individuals. Robinson v. City of Pittsburgh, 120 F.3d 1286 (3d Cir. 1997).

Question 29

What administrative remedy must a plaintiff satisfy before filing suit under Title VII?

Answer 29

to bring a claim under Title VII, a plaintiff must file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC and procure a notice of the right to sue. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.d 157 (3d Cir. 2013)

Question 30

What are the parameters of a civil action in a Title VII case after an EEOC charge is closed?

Answer 30

The parameters of the civil action in district court are defined by the scope of the EEOC investigation which can be reasonably be expected to grow out of the charge of discrimination, including new acts which occurred during the pendency of the pro-ceedings before the EEOC. Atkinson v. Lafayette College, 460 F.3d 447 (3d Cir. 2006); Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.d 157 (3d Cir. 2013).

Question 31

How long does a plaintiff have to file a complaint with the EEOC in a deferral state like PA?

Answer 31

To bring suit under Title VII, a claimant in a deferral state like Pennsylvania must first file a complaint with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful em-ployment practice. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.d 157 (3d Cir. 2013).

Question 32

What is the continuing violations doctrine?

Answer 32

Under the continuing violations doctrine, discriminatory acts that are not indi-vidually actionable may be aggregated to make out a hostile work environment claim; such acts “can occur at any time so long as they are linked in a pattern of actions which continues into the applicable limitations period. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.3d 157 (3d Cir. 2013).

Question 33

What is required to prove a continuing violation?

Answer 33

To allege a continuing violation, the plaintiff must show that all acts which constitute the claim are part of the same unlawful employment practice and that at least one act falls within the applicable limitations period. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.3d 157 (3d Cir. 2013).

Question 34

Is “me-too” evidence admissible in employment discrimination cases?

Answer 34

“Me-too” evidence in an employment discrimination case is neither per se admissible or inadmissible. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.3d 157 (3d Cir. 2013). Rather, the question of whether evidence of discrimination against other employees by other su-pervisors is relevant is fact based and depends on several factors, including how closely related the evidence is to the plaintiff’s circumstances and theory of the case. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.3d 157 (3d Cir. 2013).

Question 35

What is required to prove constructive discharge?

Answer 35

To establish constructive discharge, the plaintiff must show that the employer knowingly permitted conditions of discrimination in employment so intolerable that a reasonable person subject to them would resign. Mandel v. M&Q Packaging Corp., 706 F.3d 157 (3d Cir. 2013).