The Percy Program

It is a fight to level the playing field to be able to compete for jobs and careers on the basis of skills and make available apprentice training to all. In 1973 Al Percy launched a class action lawsuit to give workers like him a chance to better their lot in life. It would also ensure the availability of skilled workers to build the infrastructure of the future. Who is Al Percy? What is the lawsuit?

A short video follows below. there are also helpful and informative links on this website

Views
1 year ago

Matter of Fullilove v Beame 48 NY2d 376 regarding Executive Order 45 unenforceable and unconstitutional

  • Text
  • Employment
  • Affirmative
  • Regulations
  • Minority
  • Discrimination
  • Fullilove
  • Broidrick
  • Beame
  • Legislative
  • Persons
  • Unenforceable
  • Unconstitutional

Matter of Fullilove v Beame 48 NY2d 376 regarding Executive Order 45 unenforceable and

Matter of Fullilove v Beame, 48 N.Y.2d 376 (1979) 398 N.E.2d 765, 423 N.Y.S.2d 144, 22 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 30,572 48 N.Y.2d 376, 398 N.E.2d 765, 423 N.Y.S.2d 144, 22 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 30,572 In the Matter of H. Earl Fullilove et al., Respondents, v. Abraham Beame, as Mayor of the City of New York, et al., Appellants. Court of Appeals of New York Argued September 5, 1979; decided November 20, 1979 CITE TITLE AS: Matter of Fullilove v Beame SUMMARY Appeal, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered September 28, 1978, which unanimously affirmed an order and judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Abraham J. Gellinoff, J.), entered in New York County in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, (1) converting the proceeding into an action for declaratory judgment, (2) granting summary judgment to plaintiffs, (3) declaring unconstitutional, illegal and unenforceable certain rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to executive orders of the Mayor of the City of New York relating to equal employment contract compliance for construction contractors, and (4) permanently enjoining enforcement of said rules and regulations. Certain rules and regulations, effective January 15, 1977, were promulgated under the authority of executive orders of the Mayor of the City of New York, which provided that no contract may be awarded in a city or city-assisted construction contract until the contractor selected shall submit a written program of affirmative action to ensure the opportunity for equitable participation of minority group persons and women. Failure to comply with the regulations could result in sanctions, imposed at the discretion of the Deputy Mayor of the City of New York, including cancellation of the contract and exclusion from further contracts. The regulations provided that the effect of the program shall be measured by the progress made toward employment of minority group persons in a number ”substantially equivalent“ to their percentage of the work force. Special Term invalidated said rules and regulations, finding that they impermissibly required actual employment of persons solely by virtue of their status as minority group members and compelled a quota, however vaguely defined, rather than merely increasing the pool of eligibles for employment. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding, in a Per Curiam opinion, that the executive does not have the authority to *377 initiate such affirmative action without legislative authorization. Matter of Fullilove v Beame, 64 AD2d 961, affirmed. Civil Rights Discrimination in Employment Affirmative Action HEADNOTES © 2020 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1

Tag-along Lawsuits against Putative Class Defendant Members: Decision Appealed, Response and Complaint