Based on the issue, the court considers what constitutes disparate treatment and adverse employment action, resulting in gender discrimination and whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case. Title VII makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of sex, including the terms, conditions, and privileges of employment and prohibits employers from depriving individuals of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affecting his status as an employee on the basis of sex. The requirements for a prima facie case are the plaintiff is part of a protected class, qualified to do the job, and adverse action resulted. Once established, the defendant or employer justifies the business decision taken. If the employer shows a legitimate business reason that is nondiscriminatory, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show the reason is pretextual (Drachsler, 2005, p. 230). This shifting burden of proof is from Supreme Court’s requirement set in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green 411 U.S. 792 (1993). As seen next, the court applies these rules to the facts presented
Based on the issue, the court considers what constitutes disparate treatment and adverse employment action, resulting in gender discrimination and whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case. Title VII makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of sex, including the terms, conditions, and privileges of employment and prohibits employers from depriving individuals of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affecting his status as an employee on the basis of sex. The requirements for a prima facie case are the plaintiff is part of a protected class, qualified to do the job, and adverse action resulted. Once established, the defendant or employer justifies the business decision taken. If the employer shows a legitimate business reason that is nondiscriminatory, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show the reason is pretextual (Drachsler, 2005, p. 230). This shifting burden of proof is from Supreme Court’s requirement set in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green 411 U.S. 792 (1993). As seen next, the court applies these rules to the facts presented