In the case of Doe v ZYX Corporation, the plaintiff John Doe accuses his employer of giving a discriminatory test, and that the company dress code is biased against men. The dress code addresses the length of men's hair and not women's. The grooming code allows pieced ears for females but not for males. To prove Doe's claim he must show: disparate treatment, intentional discrimination against a class, or disparate impact. Disparate treatment is overt: …showed first 75 words of 1504 total…

…showed last 75 words of 1504 total…Business Horizons, Jan/Feb2000, Vol 43, Issue 1, p2, 3p, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Retreived November 2nd, 2003, from http://web13.epnet.com/citation.asp?tb=1&_ug=dbs+0%2C1%2C2%2C3%2C4%2C5%+In+en%2Dus+sid+3300E08... Rukivina, John (2003)Body Peircing and other Title VII Troubles, Primemia business magazines & Media Inc., Retreived on November 9th, 2003, from file://C:My DocumentsUNIVERSImgt 434week-2Body-piercing and other Title VII troubles.htm <Tab/>