Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

HRCI Exam PHR Topic 2 Question 107 Discussion

Actual exam question for HRCI's PHR exam
Question #: 107
Topic #: 2
[All PHR Questions]

As a HR Professional you must be familiar with several different lawsuits and their affect on human resource practices today. This adverse impact lawsuit determined that discrimination need not be deliberate or observable to be real. Employees were segregated by race and were allowed to work only in the lowest paid position. What lawsuit is described?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Fran should not inspect Lucas' work just because he has asked for time off based on a religious holiday.

Answer option A is incorrect. There's no evidence of past historical discrimination in this example.

Answer option B is incorrect. This isn't a valid answer for the question as any discrimination based on religion falls into disparate discrimination.

Answer option C is incorrect. Quality control does inspect the quality of the work, but it's equal for all project deliverables, not just the deliverables tied to Lucas and his request for time off for the religious holiday.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Arlen
5 days ago
Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971 is the answer. That case showed that even if you're not actively trying to discriminate, you could still be in hot water. It's like when you accidentally invite your boss to your pool party, but then realize your pool is filled with jello.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashandra
8 days ago
Definitely Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971. That case was a real game-changer. Now HR professionals have to watch out for even the most subtle forms of discrimination. Although, to be fair, I heard Duke Power was paying their employees in dinosaur bones back then.
upvoted 0 times
...
Herschel
10 days ago
I remember studying this case, it really highlighted the importance of addressing unintentional discrimination in the workplace.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shelton
11 days ago
I'm pretty sure it's Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971. That case really shook up the HR world back in the day. Kinda like when your boss asks you to take a DNA test to prove you're not an alien, you know?
upvoted 0 times
...
Belen
12 days ago
I agree with Annelle, because in that case, discrimination was found even though it was not intentional.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leontine
17 days ago
Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971 is the correct answer. This landmark case established that even neutral employment practices that have a disproportionate adverse impact on protected groups can be considered discriminatory.
upvoted 0 times
Alline
4 days ago
A) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Annelle
17 days ago
I think the lawsuit described is A) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77