Legal Definitions - disparate treatment

Disparate treatment refers to a form of intentional discrimination where an individual is treated less favorably than others because of their membership in a protected group. This means that an employer or other entity consciously makes decisions or takes actions that disadvantage someone specifically due to characteristics such as their race, gender, age, religion, national origin, or disability.

The core element of disparate treatment is the presence of discriminatory intent or motive. It's not about the impact of a neutral policy, but rather about a deliberate choice to treat someone differently because of who they are.

Here are some examples illustrating disparate treatment:

• Example 1: Hiring Decisions Based on Age

  A technology startup is looking to hire a lead software developer. Two candidates, Maria (58 years old with 30 years of experience) and David (32 years old with 10 years of experience), both have impressive resumes and perform well in technical interviews. However, the hiring manager explicitly tells the HR department, "We're really trying to cultivate a young, energetic team, so let's go with David." Maria is not offered the position.

  This is an example of disparate treatment because Maria was intentionally denied the job opportunity specifically due to her age, a protected characteristic. The hiring manager's statement reveals a discriminatory intent to treat older candidates less favorably.

• Example 2: Promotion Denials Based on Gender

  At a financial services firm, Emily, a top-performing analyst, consistently exceeds her sales targets and has successfully managed several high-value client portfolios for five years. She applies for a Vice President position. Her male colleague, Tom, who has similar experience but slightly lower performance metrics, also applies. The all-male promotion committee promotes Tom, with one member commenting that Tom "has the right demeanor for leadership" and that Emily might be "too emotional for the pressures of a VP role."

  Emily experienced disparate treatment because she was intentionally passed over for a promotion based on her gender. The committee's subjective reasoning and gendered comments suggest a deliberate decision to treat her less favorably than a male colleague, despite her strong qualifications.

• Example 3: Disciplinary Actions Based on Disability

  A retail store has a strict policy against using personal cell phones on the sales floor. Sarah, who has Type 1 diabetes, briefly checks her phone to monitor her blood sugar levels using a continuous glucose monitor app, which is a medical necessity. She receives a written warning and is docked a day's pay. Meanwhile, another employee, Mark, who does not have a disability, is seen scrolling through social media on his phone for several minutes but only receives a verbal reminder from a manager.

  This situation illustrates disparate treatment because Sarah, a person with a disability, faced a more severe disciplinary action for using her phone for a medical reason, compared to a non-disabled colleague who used his phone for personal entertainment. The employer intentionally treated her more harshly due to her disability-related need, even though both violated the policy.