Reference no: EM132175398

Case Analysis:

(1993) St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, in your textbook Read the overview of this case located in Appendix C of your textbook. Using online resources from the CSU Global Library (or other online resources, such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and other reputable newspaper publications, but not Wikipedia), read the details of the case.

Write a brief summary of the case from District Court through the Supreme Court ruling. In your summary, you should include the following:

The background of the case.

This should provide sufficient information for someone reading your summary to understand why the case is important. The central issue of the case. In other words, the issue that the court is trying to resolve.

The principle arguments for, and against, as presented in the case. The facts as determined by the court. These are the facts that were utilized to determine the decision of the case. Discuss the role of the Civil Right Act of 1964. Analyze the decision of the court. Was the decision derived from solid logic and reasoning.

If so, in what ways. If not, what was omitted or missed in their reasoning. Support your discussion with 3 to 4 scholarly sources Must be APA formatting See below case information 1993: St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks St. Mary's Honor Center is a halfway house run by the Missouri Department of Corrections and Human Resources (MDCHR), which hired Melvin Hicks as a correctional officer in 1978 and, in 1980, promoted him to one of the six shift commander positions at St.

Mary's. Mr. Hicks' work performance during this time was deemed to be satisfactory by his supervisors. As the result of an investigation by MDCHR, the supervisory struc-ture of St. Mary's was reorganized in January 1984, at which time Mr. Hicks' immediate supervisor was replaced, as was the superintendent of the facility. Shortly after this change, his new supervisors singled out Mr. Hicks for disciplinary actions that his peers weren't subjected to. In fact, they were more lenient with his peers even with regard to more seri-ous violations, in some cases disregarding them entirely. At one point Mr. Hicks was sus-pended, and he was later demoted from his supervisory position.

In June he was terminated for threatening his supervisor during a heated argument. At this point, Mr. Hicks filed suit, alleging discrimination on the basis of his race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Mr. Hicks was able to convince the District Court that a prima facie case of discrimination existed. St. Mary's then provided evidence of legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions (the rules infractions for which Hicks had been disciplined). Once that occurred, the burden fell once again to Mr. Hicks to show that those reasons were actually a pretext, designed to hide the racial moti-vation of St. Mary's.

The District Court found that, although the court didn't believe the reasons given by St. Mary's, Mr. Hicks had not proved that his termination was racially motivated. Based on the evidence offered, there was no way to determine whether the ter-mination had been racially motivated (unlawful) or based on personal dislike for Mr. Hicks (lawful). The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that since Mr. Hicks had proved the reasons were a pretext, he was entitled to a judgment in his favor.

When the case reached the Supreme Court, it relied on two prior cases in making its decision: McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green and Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine. Based on Green, Mr. Hicks was required to establish that a prima facie case of discrimination existed. (He did.) Once that happened, according to Burdine, St. Mary's needed to provide a lawful explanation for the adverse employment actions taken against Mr. Hicks. (It did.) Once St.

Mary's provided a nondiscriminatory reason for the iemploy-ment actions, it was once again up to Mr. Hicks to prove that those reasons were racially motivated and not based on some other, lawful motivation. (Reed) Reed, Sandra M., Anne Bogardus. PHR / SPHR: Professional in Human Resources Certification Study Guide, 4th Edition. Sybex, 2012-04-23. VitalBook file.