“Claims brought on behalf of a group of employees come in two varieties: claims of intentional discrimination (or disparate treatment) and claims of discriminatory impact (or disparate impact). The difference between these types of claims is significant, so much so that constitutional law only recognizes claims of disparate treatment, not disparate impact. Yet these two kinds of claims resemble one another, especially in the statistical evidence that the plaintiff must present in order to establish liability…. [C]lass claims of disparate treatment emphasize the historical perspective and its negative conception of equality as colorblindness, while class claims of disparate impact emphasize the remedial perspective and its goal of eliminating the effects of past discrimination.” George Rutherglen, Employment Discrimination Law 56 (2001).
disparate treatment
disparate treatment. The practice, esp. in employment, of intentionally dealing with persons differently because of their race, sex, national origin, age, or disability. • To succeed on a disparate-treatment claim, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with discriminatory intent or motive. [Cases: Civil Rights 1033, 1138. C.J.S. Civil Rights §§ 18, 20, 23–24, 34, 39–40.]
