[ad_1]
Yesterday, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit against Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) over MPS’ collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with a teachers’ union which preferences teachers who are members of an “underrepresented population” in employment decisions and prioritizes “Black Men Teach Fellows” for certain employment benefits, terms, and conditions.
“Discrimination is unacceptable in all forms, especially when it comes to hiring decisions,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Our public education system in Minnesota and across the country must be a bastion of merit and equal opportunity — not DEI.”
“Employers may not provide more favorable terms and conditions of employment based on an employee’s race and sex,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Department of Justice will vigorously pursue employers who deny their employees equal opportunities and benefits by classifying and limiting them based on their race, color, national origin, or sex.”
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, notes that MPS seeks to increase their “BIPOC staffing . . . to at least 40% by 2026,” and that by 2026–2027, at least “54.3 %” of new teacher hires “identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC).” MPS’ CBA classifies teachers for involuntary reassignment, layoff, and reinstatement depending on whether the teacher is a member of an “underrepresented population.” The United States’ complaint further alleges that MPS awards members of a third-party group organization called “Black Men Teach Fellows” multiple benefits, terms, and conditions of employment not available to female or non-black teachers, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
The complaint asks the court to declare that MPS discriminates against teachers based on their race, color, national origin, and sex, in violation of Title VII, and to enter a permanent injunction against MPS stopping them from implementing similar discriminatory provisions in a future CBA.
This case stems from an investigation launched by the Employment Litigation Section of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division.
You can view the complaint here.
[ad_2]
