433 U.S. 299 (1977)
Hazelwood School District was formed between 1949 and 1951 through the annexation of 13 rural school districts covering 78 square miles in northern St. Louis County, Missouri.1 By the 1967-1968 school year the district enrolled 17,550 students of whom only 59 were Negro; by the 1972-1973 school year enrollment reached 25,166 students including 576 Negro pupils, just over 2 percent of the total.2
Hazelwood followed unstructured hiring procedures under which every applicant received a form that was kept on file in a central personnel office.3 Principals at schools with vacancies exercised virtually unlimited discretion in choosing 3 to 10 applicants for interviews and in making final selections based on subjective factors such as personality, disposition, appearance, poise, voice, articulation, and ability to deal with people, with the superintendent and board routinely approving those choices.4 Hazelwood recruited at predominantly white colleges and universities in Missouri and bordering states but did not seriously recruit at either of the two predominantly Negro four-year colleges in Missouri.5
Hazelwood hired its first Negro teacher in 1969. Negro faculty members increased to 6 of 957 in 1970, 16 of 1,107 by the end of 1972, and 22 of 1,231 in 1973.6 The 1970 census showed that 15.4 percent of more than 19,000 teachers in the St. Louis area were Negro, a figure that included the St. Louis City School District which maintained a policy of attempting to keep a 50 percent Negro teaching staff; excluding the city, 5.7 percent of teachers in the county were Negro.7
In 1973 the Attorney General filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri alleging a pattern or practice of employment discrimination under Title VII.8 The Government introduced evidence of historical practices, statistical disparities between Hazelwood's faculty and area teachers, the standardless subjective hiring procedures, and 55 specific instances of alleged discrimination against unsuccessful Negro applicants.9 The District Court entered judgment for Hazelwood after finding the evidence insufficient on all fronts.10 The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed.11 The Supreme Court granted certiorari.12
Whether the Court of Appeals properly relied on workforce statistics comparing the racial composition of Hazelwood's teaching staff to the St. Louis area teacher population without first considering post-Act hiring data?13
In a Title VII pattern-or-practice case the Government bears the burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that racial discrimination was the employer's standard operating procedure.14 Statistics showing gross disparities between the racial composition of the work force and the qualified labor market may constitute prima facie proof of a pattern or practice of discrimination.15 Once that showing is made the employer must receive an opportunity to demonstrate that the disparity results from pre-Act hiring rather than post-Act discrimination.16
No. Hazelwood School District was formed between 1949 and 1951 through annexation of thirteen rural districts covering seventy-eight square miles in northern St. Louis County.17 By the 1967-1968 school year the district enrolled 17,550 students of whom only fifty-nine were Negro; by 1972-1973 enrollment reached 25,166 students including 576 Negro pupils.18 The district maintained unstructured hiring procedures under which principals exercised virtually unlimited discretion based on subjective factors and recruited almost exclusively at predominantly white colleges.19 Hazelwood hired its first Negro teacher in 1969 and by 1973 employed twenty-two Negro teachers out of 1,231.20 In 1973 the Attorney General sued alleging a pattern or practice of discrimination.21 The district court entered judgment for Hazelwood.22 The court of appeals reversed on the basis of workforce statistics.23 The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
The Court of Appeals erred by disregarding post-Act hiring data.24 For the 1972-1973 school year Hazelwood hired 282 new teachers of whom ten were Negro; the following year it hired 123 new teachers of whom five were Negro.25 Over the two-year period Negroes constituted fifteen of 405 new hires, or 3.7 percent.26 These figures must be evaluated against the St. Louis County and City labor market before any conclusion of a post-Act pattern or practice can be drawn.27 The case therefore requires remand for further findings.28
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the proper statistical framework.29
Related opinions on this issue
Justice Brennan joined the Court's opinion.30 The remand allows the parties to address the figures with greater care and precision.31 Even if the comparison market is found to be 5.7 percent rather than 15.4 percent black, the statistical analysis at most will not serve to bolster the Government's case.32
Hazelwood should nevertheless be given the opportunity to come forward with more focused applicant-flow data.33 The liberal substantive standards for establishing a Title VII violation, including the usefulness of statistical proof, are reconfirmed.34
Whether the St. Louis County and City labor market area for statistical comparison should include the St. Louis City School District or be limited to St. Louis County alone?35
When special qualifications are required for a job, the proper statistical comparison is between the racial composition of the employer's work force and the racial composition of the qualified public-school-teacher population in the St. Louis County and City labor market.36 The determination of that market requires evaluation of multiple factors including recruitment patterns, applicant preferences, and the effect of other districts' hiring policies.37
No. The present record does not permit a definitive answer.38 The Court of Appeals selected St. Louis County and St. Louis City as the relevant area, producing a 15.4 percent Negro teacher figure.39 Petitioners contend that the city's policy of maintaining a 50 percent Negro teaching staff distorts the comparison and that the proper figure is the 5.7 percent Negro teachers in the county alone.40 Resolution of which figure supplies the most accurate basis for comparison depends on further findings concerning the city's policies in 1970, the extent to which those policies altered the racial composition of its staff, the degree to which city recruitment diverted applicants from Hazelwood, and the experience of other county districts.41
Only the trial court can make those findings.42
The case must be remanded so the District Court can determine the appropriate comparative figure after considering the St. Louis County and City factors.43
Related opinions on this issue
One-third of the teachers hired by Hazelwood resided in the city of St. Louis at the time of their initial employment.44 It was therefore appropriate to treat the city as part of the St. Louis County and City labor market.45 In that market 15 percent of the teachers were black while less than 2 percent of Hazelwood's teachers were black.46
Even if the city is excluded, the statistical evidence would still tend to prove discrimination because Hazelwood hired only 15 black teachers instead of the 23 that would be expected from a 5.7 percent market.47 The Government is entitled to prevail on the present record because it proved a prima facie case which Hazelwood failed to rebut.48
Whether a comparison of the racial composition of Hazelwood's teaching staff to the racial composition of its student body is the appropriate statistical measure in a Title VII pattern or practice case?49
The proper comparison in a Title VII pattern-or-practice case involving teachers is between the racial composition of the employer's teaching staff and the racial composition of the qualified public-school-teacher population in the St. Louis County and City labor market.50 A comparison to student population is legally irrelevant because students are not the pool of qualified applicants for teaching positions.51
No. The District Court compared Hazelwood's teacher work force to its student population and found the statistics nonprobative because the percentage of Negro pupils was similarly small.52 That comparison fundamentally misconceived the role of statistics in employment discrimination cases.53 The Court of Appeals correctly held that the proper comparison is to the qualified teacher population in the St. Louis County and City labor market.54 The percentage of Negroes on Hazelwood's teaching staff was 1.4 percent in 1972-1973 and 1.8 percent in 1973-1974, while the percentage of qualified Negro teachers in the area was at least 5.7 percent.55
The District Court's student-body comparison therefore supplied no basis for decision.56
A student-body comparison is not the appropriate statistical measure; the case must be evaluated under the correct labor-market standard on remand.57