Document: 456 U.S. 63 102 S.Ct. 1534 71 L.Ed.2d 748 AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY, et al., Petitioners,v.John PATTERSON, al. No. 80-1199. Argued Jan. 19, 1981. Decided April 5, 1982. Syllabus Section 703(h) of the Civil Rights Act 1964 provides that "it shall not be an unlawful employment practice for employer to apply different standards compensation, or terms, conditions, privileges pursuant a bona fide seniority merit system, . provided such differences are result intention discriminate because race, color, religion, sex, national origin." Actions were brought in Federal District Court by black employees petitioner and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, charging certain lines progression job advancement established agreement with labor union after effective date constituted racially discriminatory system violation Title VII Act. The actions consolidated trial injunctive relief was initially granted, but ultimately Appeals, without deciding whether part held even if they were, § does systems adopted Held: is limited before To construe it as so contrary 703(h)'s plain language, inconsistent this Court's prior cases, counter policy. And there nothing legislative history indicate protect post-Act adoption Congress intended distinguish between application system. Pp. 1537-1542. 634 F.2d 744 (4th Cir.), vacated remanded. 1 Henry T. Wickham, Richmond, Va., petitioners American Tobacco Co., 2 Ronald Rosenberg, Washington, D. C., Unions. 3 L. Marsh, III, respondents John Patterson, 4 David A. Strauss, respondent E.E.O.C., pro hac vice, special leave Court. 5 Justice WHITE delivered opinion 6 Under Griggs v. Duke Power 401 424, 91 849, 28 158 (1971), prima facie 1964, 78 Stat. 253, amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e seq. (1976 ed. Supp.IV), "may policies practices neutral on their face intent nonetheless effect against particular group." Teamsters United States, 431 324, 349, 97 1843, 1861, 52 396 (1977). A "would seem fall under rationale" Ibid. That section, set forth 2000e-2(h), pertinent part: 7 "Notwithstanding any other provision subchapter, origin, nor give act upon results professionally developed ability test test, its administration action designed, used origin. ." 8 703(h), fact has impact alone sufficient invalidate system; actual must proved. Appeals case, however, Act.1 We granted petition certiorari address validity construction section. 452 937, 101 3078, 69 951 (1982). 9 * Petitioner Co. operates two plants one which manufactures cigarettes pipe tobacco. Each plant divided into prefabrication department, blends prepares tobacco further processing, fabrication final product. Bakery, Confectionery & Workers' International Union affiliate Local 182 exclusive collective-bargaining agents hourly paid production workers at both plants. 10 It uncontested 1963 company engaged overt race discrimination. maintained segregated locals, assigned jobs lower paying departments. Higher departments largely reserved white employees. An employee could transfer from predominately only forfeiting his seniority. 11 In 1963, pressure Government procurement agencies enforcing antidiscrimination obligations contractors, abolished departmental favor plantwide local merged local. However, promotions no longer based solely rather plus qualifications, lost accumulated event Between 1968, when policy force, virtually all vacancies filled due discretion vested supervisors determine who qualified. 12 November proposed establishment nine progression, six issue case. accepted ratified 1969. line generally consisted jobs. eligible top until he had worked bottom job. Four here nearly all-white linked departments; all-black among best 13 On January 3, 1969, Patterson filed charges Commission alleging discriminated them basis race. EEOC found reasonable cause believe petitioners' seniority, wage, classification violated VII. After conciliation efforts failed, class 1973 racial discrimination Their suit subsequent sex Following trial, promotion, court justified business necessity "perpetuated past race." App. 32. enjoined use progression. Fourth Circuit affirmed remanded proceedings respect remedy, 535 257 (1976), we denied certiorari. 429 920, 314, 50 286 (1976). 14 remand moved vacate 1974 orders dismiss complaints decision (1977), insulates attack though may have minorities. motions, holding "is operated right up day manner." 110. panel agreed "Teamsters requires modification approved regard .," within meaning 703(h). 586 300, 303 Cir. 1978). 15 reheard case en banc. did decide Instead, considered "Congress immunity accorded run those existence time VII's date, course routine applications systems." 744, 749 1980).2 reverse. II 16 Petitioners argue language applies well pre-Act systems. claim "provides narrow exemption [from ordinary test] specifically designed VII." Brief Respondent 29. supports judgment below, urges us interpret aspect 17 As cases involving statutory construction, "our starting point employed Congress," Reiter Sonotone Corp., 442 330, 337, 99 2326, 2330, 60 931 (1979), assume "that purpose expressed words used." Richards 369 1, 9, 82 585, 591, 492 (1962). Thus "[a]bsent clearly contrary, ordinarily regarded conclusive." Consumer Product Safety Comm'n GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 102, 108, 100 2051, 2055, 64 766 (1980). particularly cogent light circumstances drafting. Dirksen-Mansfield compromise bill represented "not merely weeks, months labor." 110 Cong.Rec. 11935 (1964) (remarks Sen. Dirksen). Senator Dirksen explained: "I doubt very much my whole lifetime measure received meticulous attention. tried mindful every word, comma, shading phrase." 18 makes distinction pre- systems, just tests. section take form saving clause grandfather exclude existing operation new rule. Other sections enacted same contain clauses, see 701(b), 2000e-(b), difference increases our reluctance transform previously described "defining what illegal practice. Franks Bowman Transportation 424 747, 761, 96 1251, 1262, 47 444 definitional clause. 19 EEOC's position, urged BRENNAN's dissent, more supportable. permitting "apply" terms would require reading reference followed "adopted section." But contains limitation. cognizable, accompanied proof purpose. 20 Furthermore, construing little sense. been applied rise action. arise put "applies" Such infirm unless adequate remedy adopting likely include injunction future backpay awards harmed application. injunction, lie requirement intentionally discriminatory—were satisfied. 21 interpretation statute, plaintiffs file timely challenge arguably prevail prove purposefully discriminatory. Post, 1546. See (1971). hand, seek redress than 1803 days system—for example, persons whose begins 180 adopts system—would discriminatory.4 Yet prevailed showing although entitled forbidding system: plainly allows 22 theory discourage unions employers modifying challenged. Any modification, challenged, subject standard—even benefited covered VII—thereby creating incentive retain enjoy protection 703(h).5 23 Statutes should interpreted avoid untenable distinctions unreasonable whenever possible. make adopt, apply, protected provision. must, therefore, reject reading. III 24 Although below support history. misreads 25 informed single statement anywhere saying modified Nor reveal most can said inconclusive presented case.6 26 described, U.S., 759-761, S.Ct., 1261-62, initial bill7 passed House Representatives February 10, neither majority Judiciary Committee Report8 mentioned Minority Report warned bill, enacted, destroy H.R.Rep.No.914, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 64-65 (1963), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News p. 2355. 17-day debate over referred committee, Senate voted motion refer committee began formally consider merits March 30, 1964. Meanwhile, bipartisan group led Senators Dirksen, Mansfield, Humphrey, Kuchel reach amendments ensure passage. Vaas, VII: Legislative History, B.C.Ind. Com.L.Rev. 431, 445 (1966). Mansfield-Dirksen compromise, contained introduced floor substitute May 26, 1964.9 Prior introduction substitute, supporters responded rights.10 8, Clark made speech stated clear affect all." 7207 (1964). conclusion, inserted three documents Congressional Record characterized "authoritative indicators" 703(h),11 352, 1863, relied conclusion F.2d, 749-750, n. 5. 27 first document Department memorandum stated, part, "Title rights takes effect."12 second interpretive prepared Case, also "have rights."13 written answers questions propounded included statement, "Seniority way affected bill."14 statements "existing" "established" rights, infer became effective. inference unjustified. While materials speak affecting "vested," "existing," responding specific charge bill's opponents, namely, rights. Had highly unlikely "the all,"15 (1964), response question posed said: 29 bill. If 'last hired, fired' Negro happens hired,' still 'first long done status hired' Id., 7217. 30 Respondents' argument ignores numerous references proponents couched "seniority" "existing rights." See, e.g., id., 5423 Humphrey); 6564 Kuchel); 6565-6566 (memorandum Republican sponsors); 11768 McGovern). addition, few added expressly protects valid 14329 (letter Williams). 14331 31 Going behind statute search possibly congressional "a step taken cautiously" circumstances. Piper Chris-Craft Industries, 430 926, 941, 51 124 "[I]n unusual absence usual materials," Construction hesitate dispositive weight More importantly, far-reaching limitation announced respondents. fragments cited respondents, regardless how liberally construed, do amount statute. 2056. IV 32 Our decisions emphasized "seniority afforded treatment itself," Trans World Airlines, Inc. Hardison, 432 63, 81, 2264, 2275, 53 113 refused limitations language. supra, exempts disparate differential practices. Similarly, "[a] legal equivalent occurred passed," Air Lines, Evans, 553, 558, 1885, 1889, 571 immunize perpetuate together, Evans stand proposition "[s]ection immunizes perpetuation post-Act" impact. Teamsters, 348, (emphasis added).16 date. Consistent decisions, decline respondents' invitation read 33 Seniority provisions "overriding importance" collective bargaining, Humphrey Moore, 375 335, 346, 84 363, 370, 370 "are universally these contracts." 79, 2274. Aaron, Reflections Legal Nature Enforceability Rights, 75 Harv.L.Rev. 1532, process "lies core 151. aware overall VII, eliminate employment, inevitably would, occasion, conflict favoring minimal supervision courts governmental substantive agreements. California Brewers Assn. Bryant, 598, 608, 814, 820, 55 represents balance struck policies, function upset balance.17 34 Because limiting place policy, consistent opinion.18 35 So ordered. 36 BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL BLACKMUN join, dissenting. 37 Purporting today holds plans disparate-impact standard failing purposes suits challenging plan —a (EEOC)—the turns blind eye relevance where reflects Congress' desire rights; vesting byproduct fundamental challenges adoption, application, plans, I dissent. 38 Up serving agent company's Richmond openly plants—"job assignments, cafeterias, restrooms, lockers, entrances." 257, 263 (CA4 1976). White ibid.; 33-34. pressure, altered somewhat manner computing determining promotions. Nevertheless, next five years Thus, staffed almost entirely employees; remained composed 263. 39 assent union, jobs, "top" having least "bottom" Of here, four historically remaining involved Not surprisingly, determined—and agreed—that perpetuated unsupported justification. 32; 264. Court, relying determined system,1 sustained acted formulating them.2 40 properly treats construction. follows: 41 "[I]t origin 2000e-2(h) added). Despite construes embrace describes own ambit application: declares "for system." Even able enlarge definition "adopt," greater feat legerdemain explain adopt "pursuant to" 43 significant refers employers' responsibility alone, liable §§ 2000e-2(a), (c). shield effective, exempting provision.3 44 might understandable indicated intend finds indication: "The Ante, 1539. Viewed full context rejection truly remarkable. 45 Through sought broadest prohibit 763, 1263, (1976); xander Gardner-Denver 415 36, 44, 94 1011, 1017, 147 (1974). order proper meaning, "be given liberal [and] exemptions sweep narrowed intended." Piedmont Northern R. ICC, 299, 311-312, 541, 545, 76 L.Ed. 1115 (1932). Spokane Inland 241 344, 350, 668, 671, 1037 (1916); States Dickson, Pet. 141, 165, 689 (1841). Accordingly, construed objectives beyond wished serve. demonstrated follows, basic adding expectations acquire through continued forestall legitimate arisen.4 46 early versions fears concerning possible 759, 1261.5 oppo nents charged "seriously impair [t]he corporate (1963) (Minority Report), 2433. These opponents apparently believed adopted, "benefits organized ha[d] attained matters 'right' 486 (statement Hill). defenders strong "[T]itle undermine seniority." 7206 Clark, quoting According Act's proponents, "cruel hoax generat[ing] unwarranted fear individuals rely membership maintain existence." 9113 Keating). replied simply untrue abrogated men's turned Negroes." 11471 Javits).6 some exaggeration, suggested employees' arose systems.7 48 during reference, ante, 1539-1540, reinforces view saw focusing develop pendency plan. stated: Its prospective retrospective." 7213 added).8 memoranda submitted quoted 1540, similar protecting rights.9 49 explicit EEOC, surely suggestion treat differently unrelated Rather, indicates concerned about good-faith established, systems.10 rejects because, view, "untenable" will bring "unreasonable results." 1538. reasons underlying mind force. First, suggests cannot 'applies' This reasoning superficial best. recently rejected run: " 'The focus acts, consequences [become] painful.' Delaware State College Ricks, 449 250, 258, 498, 504, 66 (1980), quotingAbramson University Hawaii, 594 202, 209 (CA9 1979). alsoChardon Fernandez, 454 6, 28, 29, (1981).11 event, analysis overlooks immediate resulting agreement: bargaining unit bound agreement. Emporium Capwell Western Addition Community Organization, 420 50, 95 977, (1975). notes "[a]n application." From premise concludes necessarily cover apparent leap assumption "[s]uch requirement[s] satisfied." undercut served "to qualify proscribe otherwise appropriate remedial 706(g), 2000e-5(g)." 758, 1261. "delineates thereby prohibited not." Ignoring ; bars successful resemble Finally, offers reason distinguishing reluctant modify "pre-Act challenged." foray field seems me excellent example propriety deference agency expertise. For obvious while pre-existing permit provision, continue receive extent allow minorities overcome discrimination, necessary; Steelworkers Weber, 443 193, 2721, 61 480 affirmative steps assist afoul modifications yet violating standard, discouraged—not encouraged. V 54 sum, find either Griggs. instant successfully demonstrated, satisfaction violate standard. charges,12 opinion. STEVENS, 56 defense produced appear member sex.1 proves promotion another defend ground implementing available, "bona fide," adopted. 57 fide" 703(h).2 VII; provide itself unlawful.3 Since requirements hiring, discharge, compensation system.4 58 confirmed systems; Indeed, liability enunciated defense. 158, reliance "professionally test," held: 59 proscribes fair form, operation. touchstone necessity. Negroes shown related performance, prohibited." 853. suggest derived scope tests 703(h); rather, concluded reflected central "objective achieve equality opportunities remove barriers identifiable employees." 429-430, 852-53. reads "specific intent" proviso define measuring system.5 unwarranted. addresses problem created "lawful" therefore presumptively clear, accrued Act, want extend benefits product deliberate limit broad historical enacted. 62 strained since impossible establish members sex. Griggs, illegality follow automatically initiation system—or system—is substantially purpose, lawful. necessity." 853; cf. New York Transit Authority Beazer, 440 568, 587, 1355, 1366, 587. reasoned ample room often need induce experienced remain, rules advancement, reward continuous, service. grants blanket conceived disagree affirm judgment. purpose.6 applicability available progression—even system—were fide."7 respectfully July 2, 1965, year enactment. banc additional contemplation 750. 1972, required 90 alleged 706(e), 260, amended 1972. now aggrieved "within hundred eighty occurred. 2000e-5(e). facts anomaly theory. adoption. theory, analyzed tests: intentional test. "Significant freedom create differing impinge discouraging dissent admits "does 1545. "adopted" nevertheless claimed 1545, 8. distinction, so, sit super-legislature," Griswold Connecticut, 381 479, 482, 85 1678, 1680, 510 (1965), none intended. H.R. 7152, Sess. (1963). 11926 examples see, 64-66 Report); 486-489 Hill); Javits discussing Governor Wallace). drafters explained alter "merely clarifie[d] present effect." 12723. Therefore evidence 7207. text 760, 16, 15, 1261, 15. 7217 760-761, 16. Strictly speaking, Clark's incorrect. retroactive victims technical error key Nowhere examination record illustrates difficulty fixing Article National Motor Freight Agreement area agreements riders. O.T.1976, 75-636, pp. 24-25. Agreements 3-year duration, 1970 complaint filed. ceases exist creates lapses, then post-Title continuously argued predates places importance refusing Given ends lack guidance, think mention bargaining. enacting expectations. 1544-1545. doing intervention All parties agree issues noted, resolution factual development. 749, 3. assumed, hold, system" applying 1860, finding vacate, decree entered earlier. sitting banc, review finding, instead inapplicable true, course, despite afford protection. 703(c)(3) attempt individual 256, 2000e-2(c)(3). employer's virtue union's involvement viewed giving 703(c)(3). Currently, occurred." At arose, occurrence 706(d), 260. Expectations arise, filed, hardly substantial. notice filing serves reduce likelihood acquiring unjustified ensuing investigation litigation charges. correctly notes, clarify, alter, "statements 703(h)." 1539, 11. 1518 Rep. Celler) ("It asserted worker vis-a-vis employer. again wrong"); 6549 Humphrey) ("The impaired"); 11486 (newsletter nonunion employees"). situations, adjustment perhaps impairment. award "such diminishes other, innocent, 774, 1269, Second, memorandum, omits italicized sentence, reasons. "prospective retrospective" ways: (1) that, unlike open grounds practices, (2) substantial arisen Both readings after, am inclined interpretation, "First, title correct. containing Dirksen's noted: retroactive, change lists." reviewed history, similarly thrust directed toward defining instances challenged perpetuating effects occurring Act." 1262 surprising active retirement Bartmess Drewrys U. S. A., 1186, 1188 (CA7 1971). instituted EEOC. indicates, 1968. 1536. immaterial 1968 sometime opportunity redetermine Contrary 1541, determination difficult; routinely determine, limitations, provides: measures earnings quantity quality work locations, subchapter differentiate wages differentiation authorized 206(d) 29." 2000e-2(h). neutral, rational 353, 396; 355-356, 1864-65. "an become discrimination." 353-354, 1863-64 "legitimate," "[n]otwithstanding subchapter," unlawful. supra. 703(a)(2) limit, segregate, classify applicants deprive tend adversely employee, individual's 2000e-2(a)(2). establishes classifies ways opportunities. "To purpose." 264-265 1976), cert. denied, 286. Unlike unnecessary timely. 1546 (BRENNAN, J., dissenting). never

Category: 1