Patterson v. McLean Credit Union
The case Patterson v. McLean Credit Union is in and of itself incredibly disturbing to speak in the mildest of terms.
1. First, justice may have been served in regards to the portion of Section 1981 in reference to the employer’s refusal to enter into a new contract. Accordingly, it is probable that the court was correct in remanding the case back to the lower court. Second, the portion of Section 1981 that the court vacated could have included wording to the effect that would allow Patterson to pursue appropriate legal action under Title VII. According to (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015, p. 111), “Title VII prohibits discrimination in training, promotion, or other workplace decisions on the basis of an employee or applicant’s race, color, gender,…show more content… Included in prohibitions are discrimination in pay, terms and conditions of employment, training, layoffs, and benefits”. Furthermore, it is apparent that Congress saw the treatment of Patterson and the law as it was applied in the case as not providing justice to the victim (Patterson). Whereas, “Congress overruled the Supreme Courts decision by enacting the Civil Rights Act of 1991” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2015, p. 124). Furthermore, it is obvious that Patterson waited so long to sue out of fear of retaliation. Specifically, retaliation that included not just the probability of losing her job but of imminent and immediate danger physically and life ending to herself and her family. Comparatively, the opportunities for Patterson to find another job should she have chosen to quit would have been minute as the supervisor would not have given her a good reference. Moreover this