A neutral hiring test that results in underrepresentation of a protected class illustrates which theory?

• A. Disparate treatment theory
• B. Affirmative action plan
• C. Disparate impact theory
• D. Quid pro quo harassment

Answer: (C)

Disparate impact occurs when a neutral hiring test or policy has a disproportionately negative effect on members of a protected class, even though there’s no intent to discriminate. In this scenario, the test is facially neutral, yet its results show underrepresentation of a protected class, signaling impact rather than bias in motive. Under Title VII, the employer must show the measure is job-related and consistent with business necessity or provide a legitimate justification; if not, the policy can be unlawful due to its discriminatory effect. This differs from disparate treatment, where individuals are treated differently because of protected characteristics and intent to discriminate is present. Quid pro quo harassment involves sexual advances tied to job benefits, not hiring test impact. Affirmative action plans are proactive efforts to increase representation, not merely a neutral test that yields underrepresentation.