Lucas v Dole Essay

In the Fall of 1987, complainant Julia Lucas appeals the expelling of her transaction inequality suit. Lucas, a ovalbumin woman, argues that she was the victim of reverse discrimination when genus genus Rosa Wright, a less qualified blackamoor woman, was promoted to the Quality Assurance and fostering specialist position at her assembly line. The judge laid-off the claim, determination that Lucas did not make off a prima(predicate) facie grimace (Open Jurist, 2011). averment of the Problem Both Julia Lucas, a snow-covered woman, and Rosa Wright, a black woman, trifle for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).They devil utilise for Quality Assurance andTraining Specialist (QATS) positions at the Flight expediency Station in Leesburg, Virginia. Both women, on with nineteen other applicants, were qualified for the two positions that were available. Edward Dietz, the official who interviewed the top four applicants, selected Rosa Wright and another woman named S haron Hall as the best candidates to fill the positions. Edward Dietz did not flip Julia Lucas. Lucas believed she was reverse discriminated and took the case to court (Open Jurist, 2011). Findings of occurrence It was verified that although FAA determined that all nineteen applicants were ualified, Wright did not have a occurrent Pilot Weather Briefing protection at the time of her selection, a QATS job requirement.Lucas presented other grounds in identify to show discrimination. She testified to the subjective nature of the interviewing process, which consisted of quintette general questions concerning the QATS position. She presented Lucas v. Dole 3 show that her answers were detailed and job specific, while Wrights were broad and could apply to many jobs. say also showed that in July 1985, Wright was given a temporary position involving education and knowledge of students learning about the air raffic bid system. The temporary position was not advertise to other work ers in the customary way, and Wright was selected sooner some workers knew of the disperseing.Five other employees also testified that race may have been a factor in the selection of Wright and in other situations at the Leesburg facility. Favoritism on that point had helped create poor labor-management relations, although it is not gather whether the advanceitism was racially motivated. The last effectuate of evidentiary support Lucas had was the comparison of her have got professional experience and qualifications with those of Wright (Open Jurist, 2011).Impact in the Workplace Reverse discrimination is a controversial form of discrimination against fragments of a dominant or majority group, including the urban center or state, or in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group (Wikipedia, 2011). Whether discrimination is change or not, Conclusions The judge dismissed the case, finding that Julia Lucas did not make out a prima facie case. In other w ords, it was not based on the first postage nor was it accepted as correct until turn up otherwise (Wikipedia, 2011). A prima facie case of unequal treatment by point or indirect evidence of discrimination is under the McDonnell Douglas framework.To establish a prima facie case under the McDonnell Douglas framework, a plaintiff must show (1) she is a member of a protected group (2) she applied and was qualified for a job that was open (3) she was rejected, and (4) the job remained vacant. Lucas satisfies the basic requirements of McDonnell Douglas, except that the job did not remain open. In her testimony, Lucas admitted that she scored in the bottom third among the interviewees, and that those above her include blacks, whites and Hispanics. In conclusion, there was no evidence that racial discrimination was involved in Rosa Wrights promotion. (Open Jurist, 2011).