Which term describes a legal theory of discrimination that affects a protected group through seemingly neutral policy?

The term that describes a legal theory of discrimination affecting a protected group through seemingly neutral policies is "disparate impact." This concept arises when a policy or practice, while not overtly discriminatory, has a disproportionately negative effect on a protected group. Unlike disparate treatment, which involves intentional discrimination against individuals based on their membership in a protected class, disparate impact focuses on the consequences of a policy rather than the intent behind it.

For example, if a company implements a hiring test that is designed to be fair but unintentionally excludes a higher percentage of applicants from a specific ethnic background, this would be considered disparate impact. The key aspect is that the policy appears neutral on its face but results in significant disadvantage for a particular protected group, thereby leading to a potential violation of anti-discrimination laws.

Other terms such as systematic discrimination refer to entrenched practices that perpetuate inequity, while disparate treatment is about intentional discrimination. Reverse discrimination typically involves favoring members of a historically disadvantaged group over those from a historically advantaged group. The nuances of these terms are essential for understanding different facets of discrimination in labor law.