422 U.S. 405 (1975), Supreme Court of the United States
Albemarle Paper Co. v.
When a plaintiff shows that a facially neutral employment test has a disparate impact on a protected group, what must an employer prove to validate the test as job-related and consistent with business necessity, and under what standard should courts award backpay to prevailing Title VII plaintiffs?
Under Title VII's disparate-impact framework (Griggs), once the plaintiff establishes that an employment practice (such as a test) disproportionately excludes a protected class, the employer bears the burden to demonstrate that the practice is job-related and consistent with business necessity. Validation must accord with professionally acceptable standards and the EEOC Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (e.g., sound job analysis; appropriate criterion, content, or construct validation; representative samples; objective, reliable criteria; and cutoff scores reflecting minimum qualifications). Even if the employer shows job-relatedness, the plaintiff may prevail by proving the availability of equally effective alternative practices with less discriminatory impact. Remedies under § 706(g) are equitable and designed to make whole the victims of discrimination; backpay is presumptively appropriate and should be denied only for reasons that would not undermine Title VII's purposes. An employer's good faith or the novelty of the legal issues is not a sufficient ground to deny backpay.
The company's test validation failed to satisfy professional standards and the EEOC Guidelines; the tests could not be justified as job-related and consistent with business necessity. The district court abused its discretion by denying backpay based on considerations inconsistent with Title VII's make-whole objective. Backpay is presumptively available to prevailing Title VII plaintiffs, and the case was remanded for the district court to fashion appropriate relief, including backpay and, where warranted, seniority remedies, consistent with the Court's standards.
Albemarle is a pillar of Title VII law. Substantively, it entrenches the disparate-impact framework, elevates the EEOC validation Guidelines as persuasive authority, and clarifies that plaintiffs can prevail by showing equally effective, less discriminatory alternatives. Remedially, it establishes a strong presumption in favor of backpay (and, by extension, robust equitable relief) to make victims whole, rejecting employer good faith as a basis to deny monetary relief. The decision shapes how courts and employers evaluate testing and other selection devices and remains a primary citation for the proof structure and remedies in disparate-impact litigation.