Regner v. City of Chicago
| Decision Date | 29 January 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 83 C 6957.,83 C 6957. |
| Citation | 601 F. Supp. 830 |
| Parties | Erlinda REGNER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Paddy Harris McNamara, Paddy Harris McNamara, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Darka Papushkewych, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.
Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment in a promotion discrimination case under Title VII. Plaintiff Erlinda Regner, a Filipino, is employed as a Librarian I by the defendant Chicago Public Library (CPL). For the reasons stated herein, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted.
On four occasions, plaintiff Erlinda Regner applied for a promotion at the Chicago Main Library. The requirements for promotion to Librarian II are a master's degree in Library Science and one year of experience as a professional librarian. Regner has fulfilled both requirements. In addition, she has been employed as a professional librarian in the Chicago Public Library System since 1977. She has been in the Business/Science/Technology division in the Central Library since December, 1979.
All four promotions for which the plaintiff applied were in the Business/Science/Technology division. Pursuant to the selection procedure of the CPL, the candidates were interviewed and rated on their responses as well as the knowledge, skills and abilities identified as relevant to each such position. Regner was not selected for any of those positions. She filed suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)), alleging that she was not chosen because of her national origin (Filipino).
Plaintiff bases her claim of discrimination on the adverse impact which the selection procedure had on minorities. In addition, she asserts that the selection procedure was not validated as racially neutral and job-related. Her disparate impact theory rests on statistical evidence regarding the number of minority librarians promoted to Librarian II over a two and one-half year period and the number of years which minority librarians spend at the CPL before being promoted.
The statistical evidence on the number of promotions made over the two-and-one-half-year period shows that 25 promotions or upgrades were granted to Librarian II and III levels at the CPL Main Library. Of these 25 promotions, 24 white librarians and 1 black librarian were promoted. A total of 61 promotions or upgrades to Librarian II and III levels were made in the entire CPL system, which includes the Main Library and all of its branches. Of these 61 promotions, 47 white librarians, 10 black librarians, 3 Asian librarians, and 1 Hispanic librarian were promoted. The percentage rates of promotion for the four groups represented in the 61 promotions is as follows: whites, 77.05 percent; blacks, 16.39 percent; Asian, 4.92 percent; and Hispanic, 1.64 percent.
The statistical evidence on the number of eligible applicants for these promotions shows that there were 81 librarians eligible for Librarian II as of January 1, 1981, broken down as follows: 63 whites amounting to 77.78 percent; 11 blacks amounting to 13.58 percent; 5 Asians amounting to 6.17 percent; and 2 Hispanics amounting to 2.47 percent. As of January 1, 1982, 89 eligible librarians break down as follows: 69 whites amounting to 77.53 percent; 12 blacks amounting to 13.48 percent; 6 Asians amounting to 6.74 percent; and 2 Hispanics amounting to 2.25 percent. As of 1983, 91 eligible librarians break down as follows: 71 whites amounting to 78.02 percent; 12 blacks amounting to 13.19 percent; 6 Asians amounting to 6.59 percent; and 2 Hispanics amounting to 2.2 percent. These statistics represent the number of Librarian I's who were employed for at least one year prior to the relevant time period. The number also represents librarians for the entire CPL system, including the Main Library and all branch libraries.
Other statistical evidence reveals percentages of racial composition for all persons qualified to be librarians in the Chicago area, according to Census for Population and Housing for the Chicago Metropolitan area. The racial composition is as follows: whites, 87.1 percent; blacks, 8.1 percent; Asians, 2.7 percent; and Hispanics, 1.7 percent. In addition, the overall percentages of persons employed within the CPL reflects the following statistics: whites, 76.4 percent; blacks, 17.1 percent; Asians, 4.4 percent; and Hispanics, 2.0 percent. In addition, there is statistical evidence which shows the average number of years elapsed between the date of beginning employment and the date of promotion: whites, 4.03 years; blacks, 5.13 years; Asians, 7.08 years; and Hispanics, 6.08 years.
Plaintiff also presented expert testimony regarding the required job description and interview questions for the position of Librarian II in the Business/Science/Technology division, which is the position which Regner applied for each time. Defendant submitted job descriptions and interview questions for the positions of Management Materials Librarian and Economics and Finance Librarian, both of which positions are in the Business/Science/Technology Division. In addition, defendant has provided the ratings of Regner and those selected for these two positions.
Under Title VII, the plaintiff has the burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination by a preponderance of the evidence. Furnco Construction Corporation v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567, 98 S.Ct. 2943, 57 L.Ed.2d 957 (1978). After a prima facie case has been established, the burden shifts to the employer to "prove that he based his employment decision on a legitimate consideration, and not an illegitimate one such as race." Id. at 577, 98 S.Ct. at 2950. In cases alleging discrimination in promotions, the plaintiff makes a prima facie case by proving that the defendant's promotional practice "selects applicants for ... promotion in a racial pattern significantly different from the pool of applicants." Albemarle Paper Company v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 406, 425, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 2366, 2375, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975). When a plaintiff relies on statistical evidence to demonstrate the disparate impact of an allegedly discriminatory practice, the statistical disparity demonstrated must be "significant" or "substantial." Hazelwood School District v. United States, 433 U.S. 299, 97 S.Ct. 2736, 53 L.Ed.2d 768 (1977); Clark v. Chrysler Corp., 673 F.2d 921, 926 (7th Cir.1982).
In the present case, plaintiff relies solely on statistical evidence to establish her prima facie case. Therefore, the Court will focus chiefly on the number of promotions and their composition as compared to the pool of eligible applicants in order to determine if the proper statistical evidence supports Regner's disparate impact theory.
1. Statistical Evidence
Plaintiff attempts to make her case for disparate impact by comparing the number of minorities chosen out of all 25 promotions at the Main Library with the number of minorities present in the pool of eligible librarians for the entire CPL system, including the branch libraries. The number of minorities (1) compared to the number of promotions (25) at the Main Library yields a minority percentage of 3.85 percent. Plaintiff compares this percentage with the minority percentage in the pool of eligible applicants for the entire CPL system, which is 22 percent. Comparing 22 percent with 3.85 percent, the plaintiff concludes that there is a significant disparity between defendant's promotional practice and the racial pattern contained in the pool of eligible applicants. In order for defendant's promotional practice to match the racial pattern in the applicant pool, the defendant had to promote 5-6 minority librarians instead of just one.
Defendant argues that the plaintiff uses the statistical evidence in a deceptive manner because she uses only promotions from the Main Library and then compares those figures to an applicant pool which encompasses eligible librarians in the entire CPL system, including the branch libraries. In order to present fair statistical evidence, defendant contends that the number of promotions should encompass the entire CPL system. If the number of promotions from the entire CPL system is used, the minority percentage of promotion is almost 23 percent, which slightly exceeds the minority percentage in the pool of eligible applicants.
In addition, defendant argues that, since the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Regner v. City of Chicago
...minorities receiving a fair percentage of promotions. The district court agreed and granted the City's summary judgment motion. 601 F.Supp. 830 (N.D.Ill.1985). While this case is perhaps unnecessarily complicated by the way statistics were offered and legal theories presented, we find summa......
- Peregrine v. Lauren Corp., Civ. A. No. 84-K-1056.