Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Griggs v. Duke Power Co.

Griggs v. Duke Power Co.

Supreme Court of the United States

December 14, 1970, Argued ; March 8, 1971, Decided

No. 124

Opinion

 [*425]  [***161]  [**851]    MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER delivered the opinion of the Court.

 We granted the writ in this case to resolve the question whether an employer is prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, from requiring a high school education  [*426]  or passing of a standardized general intelligence test as a condition of employment in or transfer to jobs when (a) neither standard is shown to be significantly related to successful job performance, (b) both requirements operate to disqualify Negroes at a substantially higher rate than white applicants, and (c) the jobs in question formerly had been filled only by white employees as part of a longstanding practice of giving preference to whites. 1

 [****5]  Congress provided, in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for class actions for enforcement of provisions of the Act and this proceeding was brought by a group of incumbent Negro employees against Duke Power Company. All the petitioners are employed at the Company's Dan River Steam Station, a power generating facility located at Draper, North Carolina. At the time this action was instituted, the Company had 95 employees at the Dan River Station, 14 of whom were Negroes; 13 of these are petitioners here.

The District Court found that prior to July 2, 1965, the effective date of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the  [*427]  Company openly discriminated on the basis of race in the hiring and assigning of employees at its Dan River plant. The plant was organized into five operating departments: (1) Labor, (2) Coal Handling, (3) Operations, (4) Maintenance, and (5) Laboratory and Test. Negroes were employed only in the Labor Department where the highest paying jobs paid less than the lowest paying jobs in the other four "operating"  [***162]  departments in which only whites were employed. 2 Promotions were normally made within each department on the basis of job seniority.  [****6]  Transferees into a department usually began in the lowest position.

In 1955 the Company instituted a policy of requiring a high school education for initial assignment to any department except Labor, and for transfer from the Coal Handling to any "inside" department (Operations, Maintenance, or Laboratory). When the Company abandoned its policy of restricting Negroes to the Labor Department in 1965, completion of high school also was made a prerequisite to transfer from Labor to any other department. From the time the high school requirement was instituted to the time of trial, however, white employees hired before the time of the high school education requirement continued to perform satisfactorily [****7]  and achieve promotions in the "operating"  [**852]  departments. Findings on this score are not challenged.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

401 U.S. 424 *; 91 S. Ct. 849 **; 28 L. Ed. 2d 158 ***; 1971 U.S. LEXIS 134 ****; 3 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 175; 3 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P8137

GRIGGS ET AL. v. DUKE POWER CO.

Prior History:  [****1]  CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT.

Disposition:  420 F.2d 1225, reversed in part.

CORE TERMS

tests, title vii, employees, high school, discriminatory, intelligence, diploma, hiring, high school education, qualifications, practices, promotion

Business & Corporate Compliance, Protection of Rights, Federally Assisted Programs, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Preemployment Practices, Labor & Employment Law, Preemployment Practices, Labor & Employment Law, Employment Practices, Selection Procedures, General Overview, Discrimination, Title VII Discrimination, Civil Rights Law, Voting Rights, Affirmative Action, Constitutional Law, Elections, Terms & Voting, Racial Discrimination, Evidence, Statistical Evidence, Disparate Impact, Testing, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Standards of Review, US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Actions