This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
IV.
We are sensitive to the fact that Hux was one of the first females
to seek advancement in a Fire Department populated predominately
by men. We certainly agree that firefighting skills are not confined to
a single gender. But this proposition does not mean that the decisions
in this case were improperly motivated or driven by anything other
than the needs of Newport News for an effective firefighting service.
In enacting Title VII, Congress sought to eliminate unlawful discrimi-
nation in the employment setting, but it did not endeavor to force
employers to undergo the burdens of trial whenever a plaintiff prof-
fered simply any response to an employer’s non-discriminatory justi-
fications. The City has offered overwhelming evidence that the
successful candidates presented stronger credentials for the position
plaintiff sought. In making and defending its decision, the City was
entitled to focus on the applicants’ qualifications taken as a whole —
a judgment not rendered pretextual by the fact that one among many
factors is allegedly in dispute. To preclude summary judgment here
would diminish the place of qualifications in promotions decisions.
The judgment of the district court is therefore
AFFIRMED.
both the City and the EEOC, which alleged discrimination in earlier
rounds of Fire Captain hiring. We have explained in detail, however, that
both the earlier and later decisions were based on legitimate consider-
ations which reflected neither discrimination or retaliation in the employ-
ment context.
12 HUX v. CITY OF NEWPORT NEWSJump to an indexed page (12 of 12)