Anna King HA 387 8.28.2007 Class Notes Damages against Discrimination Case Backpay- your lost wages and benefits. Takes away money made in the interim. Reinstatement getting your job back. Reality, it never happens. (except professors) Cost and fees- cost of litigation plus attorney's fees CRA 1991 Amended CRA 1964 Added jury trials Added punitive and compensatory damages o Punitives- 50 employees or less cap is $50k, more than 500 employees cap is $300k Burden of Proof One side has to prove something, and the other side has to prevent the one side from proving it. The job of the defense is to stop the prosecution from proving. The bloody glove doesn't fit (OJ Simpson) which means that your evidence is no good. Think of burden of proof as a football field. Standards of Proof 1. beyond reasonable doubt 2. clear and convincing evidence 3. preponderance of the evidence Texas vs Burdine Case No executive director in this company, so this woman is acting as executive director. Restructuring of the company causes her to get fired and a male replaces her. She is re-hired in new position within company and she is being compensated equally. Court tells us that the plaintiff has initial burden of proving <a href="/keyword/prima-facie/" >prima facie</a> case (prove that she is in a protected class, minimally qualified for the job, got fired, job is open/similarly situated people engaged in similar conduct and were treated differently) ((fourth one for discharge cases) o Plaintiff must prove each element of <a href="/keyword/prima-facie/" >prima facie</a> case (this is their burden) After plaintiff proves 1-4, defendant needs to prove there was a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason Supreme Court says plaintiff always have the burden or proof, but the defense still has to state their reason Plaintiff now has to prove that the defense's reason is false (pretext) Defendant has to prove that the person they hired was better than the one in the protected class. But isn't that discrimination? So all you have to do if both candidates are equal, is choose not based on discrimination. St. Mary's Honor Center vs. Hicks Black male goes from being a good employee to a bad employee when he has a new supervisor. Files discrimination case. Plaintiff says- &quot;fired because of race.&quot; Defense says- &quot;fired because you are a bad employee and we have a list of stuff you did wrong.&quot; District court says we don't see evidence of discrimination, we just think they hate you and that is a personal issue, not discrimination Court of appeals says if the plaintiff proves that it is a bullshit reason and they prove the reason is no good, plaintiff wins Supreme Court says it isn't enough to prove that defendant's reasons were false, instead you have to prove discrimination. Proving pretext does not mean victory, you have to have evidence of discrimination The jury can go back in to the jury room and ask if they believe the reason. So what else could it be? Discrimination? So the jury may infer discrimination So the jury is allowed to go back and say I don't believe their reason, but I still don't believe they're discriminating. o This is the difference between Burdine and Hicks o If you just have pretext, the jury can go either way. Plaintiff must prove that the reason articulated was not true, and the real reason was not discrimination. Jury can infer discrimination if reason was not articulated. o Pretext + evidence of discrimination, jury must fine for plaintiff o Just pretext, jury can go with way Comparison of Cases Burdine = false positives o Companies that didn't discriminate can be found guilty o Forces people to keep good records, and never lie but can cause discrimination because hirers are attempting to meet quotas etc to protect themselves Hicks = false negatives o If you're good at discrimination, you can get away with it. If you have no evidence, the jury can go back and not infer discrimination. Acknowledge that there are downsides to both. Which is better?