U.S. v. City of Chicago, Nos. 80-2008

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore CUMMINGS, Chief Judge, and PELL, SPRECHER, BAUER, WOOD and CUDAHY; CUDAHY; SPRECHER; Before FAIRCHILD, Chief Judge, and SPRECHER and CUDAHY; FAIRCHILD; CUDAHY
Citation663 F.2d 1354
Parties25 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1271, 27 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 177, 27 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,253 UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants-Appellees, v. FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, etc., et al., Intervening Defendants-Appellants. UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants-Appellees, v. Robert W. SUESS, et al., Intervening Defendants-Appellants. UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant-Appellant, v. FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, etc., et al., Intervening Defendants-Appellees.
Decision Date02 November 1981
Docket NumberNos. 80-2008,80-2146,80-2235

Page 1354

663 F.2d 1354
25 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1271,
27 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 177,
27 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,253
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants-Appellees,
v.
FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, etc., et al., Intervening
Defendants-Appellants.
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants-Appellees,
v.
Robert W. SUESS, et al., Intervening Defendants-Appellants.
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant-Appellant,
v.
FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, etc., et al., Intervening
Defendants-Appellees.
Nos. 80-2008, 80-2146, 80-2235.
United States Court of Appeals,
Seventh Circuit.
Argued En Banc Sept. 10, 1981.
Decided Nov. 2, 1981.

Page 1355

Stanley H. Jakala, Berwyn, Ill., Kendall Griffith, Chicago, Ill., for defendants-appellants.

Irving Gornstein, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Valerie A. Leopold, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Before CUMMINGS, Chief Judge, and PELL, SPRECHER, BAUER, WOOD and CUDAHY, Circuit Judges.

CUDAHY, Circuit Judge.

This consolidated appeal represents the latest phase in the protracted litigation involving the hiring and promotion practices of the Chicago Police Department. In 1976, those practices were found by the district court to have discriminated against blacks, Hispanics and women in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and mandatory quotas for the hiring and promotion of police officers were imposed to remedy the effects of this discrimination. In a previous decision, since vacated, a panel of this court affirmed the district court's denial of a joint motion by the United States and the City of Chicago (the "City") to modify the existing injunctive decree so as to reduce the black and Spanish-surnamed ("minority") promotional quota from 40% to 25% and to establish a 10% promotional quota for women. In addition, the panel affirmed another district court order, which had granted the City permission to make promotions, subject to the mandatory quota, from an eligibility roster the nondiscriminatory character of which had not been definitively tested in an evidentiary hearing. United States v. City of Chicago, 648 F.2d 1110 (7th Cir. 1981). As noted, this decision was vacated pursuant to a majority vote of the circuit judges in regular

Page 1356

active service, and this rehearing en banc followed.

We conclude that changed circumstances require modification of the 1976 decree as proposed in the joint motion, and hence vacate the order of the district court and remand with instructions to employ a 25% minority quota in future promotions sought by the United States and the City. We also instruct the district court to proceed expeditiously with an evidentiary hearing to consider the validity under Title VII of the procedures used in compiling the current sergeant eligibility roster. We further authorize the district court, at its discretion, to hold promptly an evidentiary hearing to determine whether any further modifications of the minority promotional quotas are indicated on the basis of current conditions. This inquiry may also address the important matter of a promotional quota for women.

I.

Because this appeal involves the effect of changed circumstances since the entry of the original decree by the district court in 1976, it is necessary to set forth at least in outline the history of this litigation. On February 2, 1976, the district court entered its final decree finding the Chicago Police Department guilty of race and sex discrimination in violation of Title VII. United States v. City of Chicago, 411 F.Supp. 218 (N.D.Ill.1976). 1 As part of its final decree, the court imposed mandatory hiring and promotional quotas to remedy the effects of past discrimination. The decree established as a "long term goal" the appointment to the police force of sufficient numbers of qualified blacks, Spanish-surnamed persons and females to increase substantially the minority composition of the Police Department so that it would more nearly reflect the racial and ethnic composition of the City's work force as a whole. 2 To ensure the prompt achievement of this goal, the court ordered that 42% of all future patrol officer vacancies be filled by qualified black and Spanish-surnamed males, and 16% of the vacancies be filled by qualified females, until further order of the court. 411 F.Supp. at 249.

With respect to promotion from patrol officer to sergeant, which is the subject of this appeal, the district court's final decree provided:

The Chicago defendants shall adopt and seek to achieve a goal of promoting blacks, Spanish-surnamed persons and females to the rank of sergeant so as to have and maintain a sergeant mix reasonably representative of the patrol force, the minority and female percentages of which will begin to increase under the provisions of this decree relating to the appointment of patrol officers.

411 F.Supp. at 250 (emphasis supplied). To ensure the attainment of this latter goal, the decree provided that, until further order of the court, 40% of all promotions to sergeant were to consist of black and Spanish-surnamed persons, subject to the availability of qualified applicants. 3 In meeting this goal or quota, the City was authorized to use the eligibility list based on the results of the 1973 sergeant examination, until new selection methods were developed or until minority names on the list were exhausted.

On appeal, this court upheld both the finding of unlawful discrimination and the imposition of mandatory quotas. United

Page 1357

States v. City of Chicago, 549 F.2d 415 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 875, 98 S.Ct. 225, 54 L.Ed.2d 155 (1977). In reversing a portion of the district court decree which had allowed the City to disregard existing eligibility rosters as long as the mandatory quotas were met, we held that hiring and promotions were to be made, insofar as possible, from eligibility rosters compiled pursuant to state law. 4 We therefore required that all promotions to sergeant, after filling the 40% minority quota, were to be made in rank order from such an eligibility roster. 5

On August 18, 1976, the City submitted for the approval of the district court a new roster of qualified candidates for appointment to the patrol officer force. This roster was established on the basis of new selection procedures, including a revised patrolman examination given in 1975. The district court found that the results of the new procedures displayed a pattern with respect to race and sex that was not significantly different from that of the pool of applicants. Hence, the court concluded that the use of the new roster did not constitute a prima facie violation of Title VII. United States v. City of Chicago, 420 F.Supp. 733 (N.D.Ill.1976), aff'd, 567 F.2d 730 (7th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 932, 98 S.Ct. 2832, 56 L.Ed.2d 777 (1978). A nondiscriminatory hiring procedure thus having been conceived and put into practice, the district court suspended the hiring quotas for minority and female patrol officers contained in the 1976 final decree. Thus, since 1976, the hiring of patrol officers has proceeded without the aid of mandatory quotas.

In December 1979, the City, having administered a new examination to patrol officers for promotion to sergeant, posted the list of successful applicants resulting from the new exam. 6 The City expected to make fewer than 400 promotions from this list. Although 26% of the applicants were black or Spanish-surnamed, only 7% of the top 400 in rank belonged in these minorities. 7 These results showed a greater disparity between the proportions of white and minority candidates and white and minority entries found qualified for the rank of sergeant than did the 1973 sergeant examination, which had been declared invalid. 8

Page 1358

Meanwhile, as a result of the operation of the 40% quota imposed in 1976, by early 1980, the racial composition of the sergeant force approached substantial parity with that of the patrol officer force. 9

On June 24, 1980, the United States and the City filed a joint motion for entry of a "consent decree" seeking to reduce the minority quota for promotion of sergeants from 40% to 25%. 10 The motion also sought to establish a 10% promotional quota for women. 11 The district court denied the motion on July 22, 1980, and the City appeals. 12

Immediately following the denial of the joint motion, the City moved for permission to promote sergeants from the 1979 sergeant eligibility roster, subject to the 40% minority quota in the 1976 decree. The Suess intervenors, who represent white male patrol officers ranked in the first 400 of the 1979 roster, moved to stay, or in the alternative to enjoin, the promotions other than in rank order until the validity of the 1979 selection procedures (based on the examination administered at that time) was adjudicated. On July 25, 1980, the district court granted the City's motion to promote and denied the intervenors' motion to stay or enjoin the promotions. The Suess intervenors and the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) appeal from these rulings.

II.

In denying the joint motion for the entry of a "consent decree," the district judge stated that "no showing has been made to warrant a modification of the (1976) decree." 13 The City argues that the court incorrectly applied the allegedly rigorous standard for the modification of a permanent injunction rather than the less stringent standard governing the approval of settlement agreements. 14 We cannot accept

Page 1359

this contention. The district court correctly treated the joint motion as a motion to modify a permanent injunction. 15 The joint motion in the instant case was not a voluntary agreement among the parties settling the dispute prior to an adjudication on the merits. Rather, a decision on the merits had already been rendered and a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
49 practice notes
  • Orantes-Hernandez v. Gonzales, No. CV82-01107-MMM(VBKX).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Central District of California
    • July 24, 2007
    ...v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367, 379, 112 S.Ct. 748, 116 L.Ed.2d 867 (1992); see also United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354, 1359 (7th Cir.1981) (noting that "numerous cases have mechanically employed the Swift `grievous wrong' test, thereby suggesting that hardshi......
  • Segar v. Smith, Nos. 82-1541
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • June 26, 1984
    ...Sawyer, 678 F.2d 257, 294 (D.C.Cir.1982); Chisolm v. U.S. Postal Service, 665 F.2d 482 (4th Cir.1981); United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354 (7th Cir.1981); Ass'n Against Discrimination in Employment, Inc. v. City of Bridgeport, 647 F.2d 256 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 988, ......
  • Thompson v. Sawyer, Nos. 80-2098
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • April 27, 1982
    ...whether alternative, equally effective methods could supplement or supplant resort to a quota. See United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354 (7th Cir. While the quotas set by Judge Richey here would surely work major changes in employment practices at GPO, they fall outside these guid......
  • Donovan v. Robbins, Nos. 84-1287
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • January 3, 1985
    ...case disappears. Such a reading is suggested, but without discussion of the point, in our decision in United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354, 1359 n. 15 (7th Cir.1981) (en banc); see also Williams v. City of New Orleans, 694 F.2d 987, 989 (5th Cir.1982), on rehearing, 729 F.2d 1554......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
49 cases
  • Orantes-Hernandez v. Gonzales, No. CV82-01107-MMM(VBKX).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Central District of California
    • July 24, 2007
    ...v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367, 379, 112 S.Ct. 748, 116 L.Ed.2d 867 (1992); see also United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354, 1359 (7th Cir.1981) (noting that "numerous cases have mechanically employed the Swift `grievous wrong' test, thereby suggesting that hardshi......
  • Segar v. Smith, Nos. 82-1541
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • June 26, 1984
    ...Sawyer, 678 F.2d 257, 294 (D.C.Cir.1982); Chisolm v. U.S. Postal Service, 665 F.2d 482 (4th Cir.1981); United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354 (7th Cir.1981); Ass'n Against Discrimination in Employment, Inc. v. City of Bridgeport, 647 F.2d 256 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 988, ......
  • Thompson v. Sawyer, Nos. 80-2098
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • April 27, 1982
    ...whether alternative, equally effective methods could supplement or supplant resort to a quota. See United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354 (7th Cir. While the quotas set by Judge Richey here would surely work major changes in employment practices at GPO, they fall outside these guid......
  • Donovan v. Robbins, Nos. 84-1287
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • January 3, 1985
    ...case disappears. Such a reading is suggested, but without discussion of the point, in our decision in United States v. City of Chicago, 663 F.2d 1354, 1359 n. 15 (7th Cir.1981) (en banc); see also Williams v. City of New Orleans, 694 F.2d 987, 989 (5th Cir.1982), on rehearing, 729 F.2d 1554......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT