89 F. Supp. 3d 944
S.D. Ohio2015Background
- In 2007–2008 Ohio enacted statutes (Ohio Rev. Code §§ 3319.39, 3319.391) requiring background checks and mandating termination for employees with certain convictions; CPS applied the law in 2008.
- Plaintiffs Gregory Waldon and Eartha Britton were long‑term CPS employees discharged (Waldon retired after notice; Britton terminated) based on decades‑old convictions known to CPS when they were hired.
- CPS terminated ten employees under the statute; nine of the ten were African‑American.
- Plaintiffs sued for race discrimination under Title VII and Ohio law, alleging the statute had a disparate impact on African‑Americans and seeking summary judgment on liability; CPS moved for summary judgment arguing plaintiffs failed to show statewide disparate impact.
- The district court considered whether plaintiffs had established a prima facie disparate‑impact claim by appropriate statistical proof of disproportionate effect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the state statute can be challenged under Title VII disparate‑impact theory | The statute, though facially neutral, had a disparate impact at CPS (9 of 10 terminations were Black); Title VII overrides inconsistent state laws | State mandate applied statewide; plaintiffs must show disproportionate impact on the entire group to which the law applied (statewide public school employees) | Court: Title VII covers facially neutral state laws with discriminatory impact, but plaintiffs failed to prove statewide disparate impact, so prima facie case not established |
| Proper "total group" for statistical comparison in disparate‑impact claim | The relevant pool is CPS’s employee population (the group to which the policy was applied locally) | The relevant pool is the statewide population of public‑school employees affected by the statute | Court: Because the law was a statewide mandate and was applied uniformly, plaintiffs needed statewide statistics and failed to produce them |
| Whether court must reach business‑necessity defense if prima facie case not made | Plaintiffs: CPS cannot justify the policy and no business necessity shown | CPS: Even if impact shown, the policy may be justified by safety/business necessity | Court: Did not reach business‑necessity because plaintiffs failed to establish prima facie disparate impact |
| Whether state‑law claim survives if federal claim fails | Plaintiffs invoked Ohio anti‑discrimination law | CPS argued federal failure defeats state claim | Court: State claim dismissed as it depended on federal claim (state remedy fails with federal claim) |
Key Cases Cited
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971) (establishes disparate‑impact liability for facially neutral practices with discriminatory effects)
- Betsey v. Turtle Creek Assocs., 736 F.2d 983 (4th Cir. 1984) (defines correct statistical pool as the total group to which the challenged policy was applied)
- Regner v. City of Chicago, 789 F.2d 534 (7th Cir. 1986) (permits focusing on a subunit when the challenged practice is particular to that subunit)
- Grant v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cty., 446 Fed. Appx. 737 (6th Cir. 2011) (prima facie disparate‑impact framework requires identification of specific practice and statistical showing of adverse effect)
- Isabel v. City of Memphis, 404 F.3d 404 (6th Cir. 2005) (explains employer's burden to show business necessity and plaintiff's burden to propose less discriminatory alternatives)