Legal Definitions - systematic violation

A systematic violation refers to a discriminatory practice that is not an isolated incident but rather an ongoing pattern, policy, or procedure within an organization, particularly an employer. Instead of a single act of discrimination, it involves a built-in mechanism or established way of operating that consistently disadvantages a particular group of people.

Because the discrimination is embedded in a system or policy, its harmful effects are considered continuous. This means that individuals affected by it may still be able to bring a legal claim even if the policy was first implemented a long time ago, as long as its discriminatory impact persists and affects them within a relevant timeframe for filing a complaint.

• Example 1: Discriminatory Hiring Algorithm

  A large tech company uses an AI-powered hiring algorithm that, unbeknownst to the company, was trained on historical data reflecting past biases. As a result, the algorithm consistently filters out resumes from candidates who attended historically Black colleges and universities, even if they are highly qualified. This is a systematic violation because the discriminatory outcome is not due to a single biased recruiter, but rather an inherent flaw in an established company procedure (the algorithm) that continuously produces discriminatory hiring decisions over time.

• Example 2: Unequal Pay Structure

  A manufacturing company has a compensation policy that, for certain roles, automatically assigns lower starting salaries to new hires based on their previous salary history, rather than their qualifications or market rates. If women or minority groups historically earned less in previous jobs due to systemic discrimination, this policy would perpetuate and embed that pay disparity, leading to a systematic violation. The discriminatory effect continues with every paycheck, making it an ongoing issue as long as the policy is in place.

• Example 3: Promotion Track Barriers

  A professional services firm has an unwritten but widely understood policy that only employees who regularly socialize with senior partners outside of work hours are considered for partnership track promotions. If this expectation disproportionately disadvantages employees with significant family care responsibilities (who are often women) or those from cultural backgrounds where such networking is less common, it creates a systematic barrier to advancement. The violation is systematic because it's an embedded practice that continuously limits opportunities for a specific group, rather than a one-time unfair promotion decision.