18.

For a review of Title VII law, its development and implications see "Employer Discrimination and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Harvard Law Review, Vol. LXXXIV (March 1971), 1109ff; Arthur M. Brewer, "Title VII: How to Break the Law Without Trying," Catholic University Law Review, Vol. XXI (Fall 1971), 103ff; Marvine J. Levine and Anthony J. Montcalmo, "The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Progress, Problems, Prospects," Labor Law Journal, Vol. XXII, No. 12 (1971), 779ff; Ronald A. Bender, "Title VII, Seven Years After," Montana Law Review, Vol. XXXII, No. 2 (1971), 229ff; William F. Gardner, "The Development of the Meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Alabama Law Review, Vol. XXIII, No. 3 (1971), 451ff; Stanley P. Herbert and Charles L. Reichel, "Title VII and the Multiple Approaches to Eliminating Discrimination," New York University Law Review, Vol. 46 (May 1971), 449ff; William B. Gould, "The Emerging Law Against Racial Discrimination in Employment," Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. LXIV, No. 3 (1969), 359ff.

19. Cox v. U.S. Gypsum Company, 409 F. 2d 289 (7th Cir. 1969); also Tipett v. Ligget and Myers Tobacco Company, 316 F. Supp. 292 (M.D. N.C. 1970).

20. Culpepper v. Reynolds Metal Company, 421 F. 2d 888 (5th Cir. 1970). See also, Hutchings v. United States Industries, Inc., 428 F. 2d 303 (5th Cir. 1970).

21.

Waters v. Wisconsin Steel Workers of International Harvester, 427 F. 2d 476 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 911 (1970). See also, Boudreaux v. Baton Rouge Marine, 3CCH E.P.D. 18107 (5th Cir. 1971); Young v. International Telephone and Telegraph Company, 3CCH E.P.D. 18118 (3rd Cir. 1971).

22. Sanders v. Dobbs House Inc., 431 F. 2d 1097 (5th Cir 1970).

23. Spell v. Local 77, International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and Moving Picture Machine Operators, 60 CCH Lab. Cas. 6680 (D.N.J. 1969); Holliday v. Railway Express Company, 306 F. Supp. 898 (N.D. Ga. 1969).

24.

Ibid.; Lewis v. Hayes International Corporation, Civil No. 70-759 (N.D. Ala., filed Oct. 7, 1970).

25. Dent v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry., 406 F. 2d 399 (5th Cir. 1969), rev'g 265 F. Supp. 56 (N.D. Ala. 1967); Johnson v. Seaboard Airline R.R., 405 F. 2d 645 (4th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 918 (1969).

26. Fekete v. United States Steel Corp., 424 F. 2d 311, 336 (3rd Cir. 1970); Grimm v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 300 F. Supp. 984 (N.D. Calif. 1969).

27. Hutchings v. United States Industries, Inc., 428 F. 2d 303, 309 (5th Cir.1970).

28.

FOOTNOTES - CHAPTER 2 (continued)

Austin v. Reynolds Metal Co., 62 Lab. Cas. 19408 (E.D. Va. 1970); McQueen v. E.M.C. Plastic Co., 302 F. Supp. 881 (E.D. Tex. 1969). But see, Harris v. National Tea Company, 4 EPD 17596 (7th Cir. 1971).

F. 2d

29. Bowe v. Colgate Palmolive Co., 416 F. 2d 711 (7th Cir., 1969); Samuel v. T. E. Wannamaker, Inc., 59 CCH Lab. Cas. 19169 (D.S.C. 1969).

30.

Bremer v. St. Louis S.W. R.R., 310 F. Supp. 1333 (E.D. Mo. 1969); Smith v. Hughes Tool Co., 62 CCH Lab. Cas. 6741 (N.D. Tex. 1970).

31. Norman v. Missouri Pacific R.R., 414 F.2d 73 (8th Cir. 1969); Bremer v. St. Louis S.W. R.R., 310 F. Supp. 1333 (E.D. Mo. 1969); King v. Georgia Power Co., 295 F. Supp. 943 (N.D. Ga. 1968).

32. U.S. v. H.K. Porter Co., 296 F. Supp. 40, 109 (N.D. Ala. 1968); Hutchings v. U.S. Industries, Inc., 428 F. 2d 303, 314 (5th Cir. 1970). 33. Sanchez v. Standard Brands, 431 F. 2d 455 (5th Cir. 1970). 34. Bowaters Southern Paper Corp. v. EEOC, 428 F. 2d 799 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 942 (1970). See also, United Nuclear-Homestake Partners v. EEOC, 461 F. 2d 1055 (10th Cir. 1972).

35. Hart v. Buckeye Industries, Inc., 46 F.R.D. 61 (S.D. Ga. 1968); Edmonds v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 315 F. Supp. 523 (D. Kan. 1970).

36. U.S. v. Gustin-Bacon Division, Certain-Leed Products Corp., 426 F.2d 539 (10th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 832 (1970).

37.

Graniteville Co. (Sibley Division) v. EEOC, 438 F. 2d 32 (4th Cir. 1971); Georgia Power Co. v. EEOC, 412 F 2d 462 (5th Cir. 1969); Rogers v. EEOC, 4 EPD 17597 (5th Cir. 1971).

F. 2d

38. Georgia Power Co. v. EEOC, 412 F. 2d 462, 468 (5th Cir 1969).

39. Blue Bell Boats, Inc. v. EEOC, 418 F. 2d 355 (6th Cir. 1969); Graniteville Co. v. EEOC, 1 CCH Empl. Prac. Guide (3 CCH E.P.D.) 8109, at 6319 (4th Cir. Feb. 5, 1971); Parliament House Motor Hotel v. EEOC, 1 CCH Empl. Prac. Guide (3 CCH E.P.D.) 8277 (5th Cir.July 7, 1971).

40. Smith v. Universal Services, Inc., 454 F. 2d 154 reh'g denied per curiam 4 EPD 17704 (5th Cir 1972). Contra: Gillin v. Federal Paper Board Co., 62 CCH Lab. Cas. 19425 at 6665 (D. Conn. 1970).

41. William F. Gardner, op. cit., pp. 481-89.

42. Hall v. Werthan Bag Co., 251 F. Supp. 184
251 F. Supp. 184 (M.D. Tenn. 1966).

43. Jenkins v. United Gas Corp., 400 F. 2d, (5th Cir, 1968).

44. Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, 417 F. 2d 1122 (5th Cir.1969).

45. Compare Haskett v. McGuire Brothers, Inc., 445 F. 2d 442 (3rd Cir. 1971) with Cooper v. Allen, F. 2d 5 EPD 17952 (5th Cir.1970), and

Hyatt v. United Aircraft Corp., 50 F.R.D. 242 (D. Conn. 1970).

46. Carr v. Conoco Plastics, Inc., 295 F. Supp. 1281 (N.D. Miss. 1969), aff'd, 423 F. 2d 57 (5th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 951 (1970); Wilson v. Monsanto Co., 315 F. Supp. 977 (E.D. La. 1970).

50.

Culpepper v. Reynolds Metal Co., 421 F. 2d 888 (5th Cir. 1970).

U.S. v. Hayes International Corp., 415 F. 2d 1038, 1045 (5th Cir.

Gates v. Georgia Pacific Corporation, 326 F. Supp. 397 (D. Ore.

Parham v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, 433 F. 2d 421 (8th Cir 1970).

52.

Clark v. American Marine Corporation, 304 F. Supp. 603, 2 F.E.P. 198 (E.D. La. 1969).

1969).

53.

Lea v. Cone Mills Corp., 301 F. Supp. 97, 2 F.E.P. 12 (M.D.N.C.

54. Gregory v. Litton Systems, Inc., 316 F. Supp. 401, 2 F.E.P. 842 (C.D. Calif. 1970).

55.

Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 420 F. 2d 1225 (4th Cir. 1970), 401 U.S. 424 (1971).

56. Ibid.

57. Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp., 416 F. 2d 1257 (5th Cir. 1969), reversed 400 U.S. 542 (1971).

58.

Hicks v. Crown Zellerback Corp., 310 F. Supp. 536, 2 F.E.P. 433 (E.D. La. 1970).

59. Heat and Frost Insulator v. Vogler, 407 F. 2d 1047, 1 F.E.P. 577 (5th Cir.1969).

60.

Robinson v. Lorillard Corp., 444 F. 2d 791 (4th Cir. 1971); U.S. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 312 F. Supp. 977, 2 F.E.P. 545 (W.D. N.Y. 1970); Moreman v. Georgia Power Co., 310 F. Supp. 1357, 1 F.E.P. (N.D. Ga. 1969).

61. Quarles v. Phillip Morris, Inc., 279 F. Supp. 505, 1 F.E.P. 260 (E.D. Va. 1968).

62. Ibid.

63. Griggs v. Duke Power Co.,420 F. 2d 1225 (4th Cir. 1970), 401 U.S. 424 (1971); U.S. v. Sheet Metal Workers, 416 F. 2d 123, 2 F.E.P. 127 (8th Cir. 1969); Local 189 v. U.S., 416 F. 2d 980, 1 F.E.P. 875 (5th Cir. 1969); Broussard v. Schluberger Corp., 315 F. Supp. 506, 2 F.E.P. 874 (S.D. Tex. 1970); Irwin v. Mohawk Rubber Co., 308 F. Supp. 152,

2 F.E.P. 349 (E.D. Ark. 1970); U.S. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 446 F. 2d 652 (2nd Cir. 1971); and Long v. Georgia Kraft Co. F. 2d 4 EPD 17756 (5th Cir. 1971).

64. Lansdale v. Airline Pilots Association, International, 431 F. 2d 1341, 2 F.E.P. 869 (5th Cir. 1970).

65. Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, 311 F. Supp. 559 (S.D. Fla. 1970), 442 F. 2d 385 (5th Cir. 1971).

66.

Bowe v. Colgate Palmolive Co., 416 F. 2d 711, 2 F.E.P. 121 (7th Cir. 1969).

67. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Income of Families and Persons in the United States, Series P-60, No. 80, October 4, 1971, Table 55.

68.

The index of occupational position is computed for each racesex group in the following manner:

Pi
Ꭹ ;

=

proportion of a group's employment in occupation i

= 1966 U.S. median income by sex for the employed labor force
in occupation i.

Income weights used to compute indexes of occupational position:

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States-1969, 90th ed. (Washington, D. C.:

Government

Printing Office, 1969), p. 327.

CHAPTER 3

THE OUTCOME OF CONCILIATION AND ITS DETERMINANTS

Each party to the conciliation process can be represented as perceiving two costs: the cost of disagreeing with the other; the cost of agreeing. The parties are assumed to choose that position which minimizes their cost. For conciliation to be successful or partially successful, each party must think that the cost of disagreeing exceeds the cost of agreeing. The basic premise of this study as established within the framework of bargaining theory is that settlement in conciliation depends on the parties' bargaining strategy and power, their perception of the risk of conflict, and the expected value of the settlement if conflict occurs. This chapter is concerned with testing this premise through examination of a series of determinants of the outcome of conciliation and its impact on employment. A case study format is employed for this purpose.

Method of Analysis

The results of conciliation are the product of a complex series of forces and events not all of which lend themselves to measurement by conventional multivariate analysis. Consequently, a group of indepth case studies was utilized to examine the relationship between a comprehensive set of variables and the outcome of conciliation. Respondents were selected for study. from among those charged with employment discrimination on the basis of race in the period 1966-1969. To examine factors leading to success or failure of conciliation, and its subsequent impact on minority employment, 14 respondents were visited and interviewed during the summer of 1971. Each respondent was