LDF Sues Labor and Defense as Last Resort in Drive Against Job Bias
Press Release
April 8, 1969

Cite this item
-
Press Releases, Volume 6. LDF Sues Labor and Defense as Last Resort in Drive Against Job Bias, 1969. 73f9aa6a-b992-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/b9291225-810b-4cce-91f5-387138994fab/ldf-sues-labor-and-defense-as-last-resort-in-drive-against-job-bias. Accessed April 27, 2025.
Copied!
17 LDF SUES LABOR AND DEFENSE AS LAST RESORT IN DRIVE AGAINST JOB BIAS Massive Job Bias Litigation Anticipated WASHINGTON, D.C.---Piling of this suit against the Department of Defense and the Department of Labor today by LDF attorneys marks a new phase in a massive program of litigation against employment discrimination, The LDF has been responsible for the majority of racial employ- ment suits to implement Title VII, a total of more than 70 to date, as compared with 41 filed by the Justice Department and less than 30 filed by other organizations, LDF attorneys assisted individuals in filing more than 700 charges of employment discrimination with the Equal Employment Our litigation has been planned to systematically attack the mos t frequently used means of discrimination against minority group Sy NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. 10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 * JUdson 6-8397 BACKGROUND STATEMENT April 8, 1969 SSS STATEMENT workers, with emphasis on geographical regions with maximum unemploy- ment and underemployment among Negroes. é tation of that law so that it will become much more effective, hence our renewed effort. Procedural Problems, until recently, have slowed down the filing of suits so that our campaign moved through the courts at a snail's pace. However, these Problems have now been largely overcome. * Contributions are deductible for U. S. income tax Purposes Or e E e r i e pare: LDF BACKGROUND STATEMENT April 8, 1969 The key points of our attack are listed below: 1. oO Separate seniority lines, which limit Negroes to advance in all-black, lower-paying departments, and if a Negro gets a chance at a "white" job, require that he start at the bottom of the white seniority line. Abuse of testing procedures, through which Negroes are given tests, not given to whites and tests not relevant to the job to be performed and arbitrary evaluation of test results. Hiring and firing: It is still true that the black worker is the "last hired and the first fired." Legal action can be taken in cases where black applicants are told no vacancies exist and white applicants are hired. Similarly, firing or layoff of black workers on a discriminatory basis (frequently tied to segregated seniority lines) will also be challenged. Concentration in South: The most dramatic needs are in the South, particularly among rural populations, victims of the agricultural revolution. In view of expanding new industry in the area, it is particularly important to create new patterns of non-discriminatory employment. New plans in North: As precedents are set in LDF cases, we will develop liaison with employment groups working in the North and offer the help of our lawyers in northern cases. State employment services: In July 1968, LDF lawyers won the first suit against a state employment agency under Title VII, Anthony v. Marion Williamson, director, and Edward J. Shable, manager, Atlanta office, Georgia State Employment Service. A second suit is pending in Louisiana. State employment agencies to a very large extent control vocational training and the job market in the South and serve as funding agencies for federal funds for the training of unskilled employees. We must, therefore, take legal action whenever it is found that a state employment agency is discriminatory. * These =30= problems involved: 1) refusal by the courts to permit class actions; 2) requirement that conciliation be completed before a suit could be filed; 3) questions of timeliness involving whether the plaintiff had only 60 days to file suit after filing his charge of discrimination.