After a US court reduces a discrimination complaint, TCS receives some respite

23 Aug 2023 , 09:56 AM

A court in New Jersey has reduced the complaint by dismissing one of the three claims made by the plaintiff, eight months after a lawsuit was filed against IT giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) for discrimination and violating visa rules. The two further claims will be pursued.

The top software exporter in the nation was charged with systematic patterns of hiring and promoting non-South Asian and non-Indian candidates and employees in December 2022 by a former employee. The complainant, Shawn Katz, claimed that the company’s top-down implementation of this policy resulted in discrimination in choices about recruiting, staffing, benching, firing, and promotions.

Katz spent nine years working for the company before he was fired because he was idle and had no other work to do.

The complaint stated that TCS’s discrimination was widespread and persisted, negatively affecting non-South Asians and non-Indians throughout the organization as well as applicants who were given the short end of the stick when it came to hiring, staffing, promotion, and termination/retention choices. According to his complaint, the corporation was attempting to maximize its benching, hiring, and firing procedures to maximize visa holders or those on an employer-sponsored H-1B work visa in the US. He further claimed that TCS gave visa holders preference when hiring for TCS posts.

Referring to a group of people who have had the same or a similar injury, Katz had filed a class action lawsuit.

Katz claimed that he was the victim of unfair employment practices and discriminatory treatment based on his ethnicity and national origin. In addition to damages, he requested injunctive and declaratory relief. TCS responded by submitting a motion to dismiss, which Katz argued against.

TCS had argued that one of Katz’s disproportionate impact claims as well as claims for injunctive relief should be rejected in accordance with the ruling by Justice Brian R. Martinotti in the New Jersey District Court this month. According to the judgment, ‘TCS further asserts that all of Katz’s claims, to the extent they are based on an alleged failure to hire or place, should be dismissed.’

A facially neutral policy, or one that does not appear to discriminate, cannot be used by an employer if it still results in a sizable pattern of discriminatory hiring.

Katz was unable to make a ‘prima facie’ case for his Title VII (equality before the law) disparate impact argument, so the court did not pursue it.

The claims, according to the court, sound more like disproportionate treatment than disparate impact. Unintentional discrimination is referred regarded as having a disparate impact, whereas intentional discrimination is referred to as having a discriminatory treatment.

Katz had also requested an injunction. TCS claimed in its motion that Katz is neither requesting reinstatement or suffering harm as a result of any of TCS’s actions; yet, Katz requested reinstatement and sought injunctive relief on behalf of the class in an amended petition. The judge approved the continuation of this motion.

For feedback and suggestions, write to us at [e-mail]