What type of claim could these women have made under Title VII? Comment on the strength of the hypothetical case, including what the women would have to prove in order to establish a prima facie case and what NASA’s best defense would be.
The type of claim that the women would have made under Title VII is sex discrimination. The hypothetical case is strong because women were qualified and trained to serve as astronauts but were not allowed to do so due to their gender. In order to establish a prima facie case, the women would have to prove the following:
- They belong to a protected class (in this case, women).
- They were qualified for the job.
- They applied for a job or position for which the employer was seeking applicants.
- Despite being qualified, they were rejected.
NASA's best defense would be the requirement for jet fighter experience, which was added after the women had already been trained. NASA would have to prove that this requirement was a necessary qualification for the job. However, it is unlikely that NASA could successfully argue that the requirement was a business necessity since the women had already received training and were qualified to be astronauts.
Sex Discrimination Claim
Sex discrimination occurs when an employer treats an individual unfavorably because of their gender. In this case, the women who were admitted to NASA's astronaut training program could make a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
The strength of the hypothetical case lies in the fact that the women were qualified and had successfully completed the training required to serve as astronauts. Despite meeting all the qualifications, they were denied the opportunity to serve in space missions solely based on their gender. This demonstrates clear evidence of gender discrimination in NASA's astronaut program.
Prima Facie Case
To establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination, the women would have to show that they belong to a protected class (women), they were qualified for the astronaut position, they applied for the job, and they were denied the opportunity due to their gender. By meeting these criteria, the women could demonstrate a strong case of sex discrimination under Title VII.
NASA's Defense
NASA's best defense in this hypothetical case would likely be the requirement for jet fighter experience as a new qualification for astronauts. However, this defense may not be sufficient to justify the exclusion of qualified women from space duty.
It would be challenging for NASA to prove that jet fighter experience was a legitimate job requirement essential for astronauts, especially since the women had already completed their training and were deemed qualified for the role. The abrupt change in the qualification criteria after the women had already been trained suggests a discriminatory motive rather than a legitimate business necessity.
In conclusion, the women who were unfairly excluded from NASA's astronaut program due to their gender could have a strong claim of sex discrimination under Title VII. By demonstrating their qualifications, application for the position, and subsequent denial based on their gender, the women would have a compelling case against NASA for discriminatory practices.